chris_chi24 said:It helps to ask what evidence would change your mind before you look at any.
All true, with one condition: that curve is for people who reached the dose on schedule. Anyone who slowed the ladder for tolerability is on a different, flatter curve, and comparing yourself with the published mean will make you feel like a non-responder when you are not.
SleepFixSam said:Albumin binding above 99% is the whole reason weekly dosing works, and it is also why the trough matters more than the peak.
This is exactly what I could not find anywhere else. Sending this to two other people who asked me the same thing last week.
chris_chi24 said:It helps to ask what evidence would change your mind before you look at any.
I will push back on the "any working dose is fine" framing. The maintenance evidence sits overwhelmingly at the top studied dose, and the extension data shows regain tracking dose reduction rather than tracking stopping. Holding low is reasonable; pretending it is evidentially equivalent is not.
Certified reference materials, analytical reagents, and research-grade standards for peptide verification. Trusted by laboratories worldwide.
Shop Reference StandardsThe figures, for anyone assembling their own picture. Keep the original post as written when you update it, and add the correction underneath. An edited-away mistake is invisible to the next person who makes it.
Moderator note: the sourcing question belongs in the vendor section and has been split out. Report rather than reply if it drifts again.