Asked to pay by a method with no recourse, by a supplier I had used twice before without being asked, which is what made me stop.
The bit I cannot resolve on my own is how people are thinking about the trade-off between reversibility and privacy, because you cannot have both.
Happy to be told the question itself is wrong.
This one has a reasonably settled answer, so here it is. Worth answering the question that was asked rather than the one behind it. The narrow version usually has an answer; the broad version usually does not, and answering the broad one is how a thread stops being useful.
Dr.ObesityLA said:Worth answering the question that was asked rather than the one behind it.
That holds where the measurement is reliable. Where it is noisy — and a lot of what gets tracked here is noisy — the same reasoning produces confident nonsense.
Trusted third-party HPLC & mass spectrometry analysis. Verify peptide purity with the lab the community relies on. Independent. Accurate. Transparent.
Verify Your PeptidesEst. 1998. The synthesis house behind the vials you send for testing. ISO 9001 and cGMP certified, 1,500+ staff, batch-specific COA with every order.
Browse GL BiochemCOA_Karl said:Asked to pay by a method with no recourse, by a supplier I had used twice before without being asked, which is what made me stop.
Same pattern here, and in the same order.
Adding the clinical framing, because it changes how the question reads. It is worth asking what the claim would look like if it were false. If nothing would look different, it is not a claim about the world and no amount of discussion will settle it.