Clinical perspective, offered as context rather than as advice. 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.
OP back with an update, since a thread like this is useless without one.
Resolved. I wrote mg, ml and mg/ml on the vial in marker and did the division in that order, and the two of us now get the same number every time.
Dr.DermMIA said:Worth answering the question that was asked rather than the one behind it.
Adding the part of the answer the thread has not reached. 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.
Certified reference materials, analytical reagents, and research-grade standards for peptide verification. Trusted by laboratories worldwide.
Shop Reference StandardsOne concrete data point for the thread. Give anything pharmacological four weeks before you judge it, and give anything measured weekly a four-point rolling average before you call it a trend.
Following on from Dr.DermMIA — and this may be the naive question:
How long did you give it before you decided it was working?