dionysos
GLP-1 Novice
The remarkable thing about this first GB is that there WERE COAs PROVIDED UPFRONT!
However, Prudence is always best Nurse.
Could there be an issue with a product despite the COA?
Well yes, there could be because there are humans involved.
There could be accidental error or there could be deliberate fraud.
No one can guarantee otherwise.
The fraud likely to be performed by peptide vendors is underdosing because it increases profits. The relevant COA give us some assuranxe that isn't the case. The body of evidence provide by HISTORICAL COAs is better! One can readily see consistent underdosing by a vendor.
More rare, and more positive, is consistent full and overfull peptide weight shown by historical COAs. This tells us two things: a) the Vendor knows people are watching product quality, and, b) the vendor is willing to sacrifice profit for better quality product because he knows it will yield more purchases.
This is called Teaching The Elephants To Dance.
And there is good evidence they are learning their steps Nurse!
However, Prudence is always best Nurse.
Could there be an issue with a product despite the COA?
Well yes, there could be because there are humans involved.
There could be accidental error or there could be deliberate fraud.
No one can guarantee otherwise.
The fraud likely to be performed by peptide vendors is underdosing because it increases profits. The relevant COA give us some assuranxe that isn't the case. The body of evidence provide by HISTORICAL COAs is better! One can readily see consistent underdosing by a vendor.
More rare, and more positive, is consistent full and overfull peptide weight shown by historical COAs. This tells us two things: a) the Vendor knows people are watching product quality, and, b) the vendor is willing to sacrifice profit for better quality product because he knows it will yield more purchases.
This is called Teaching The Elephants To Dance.
And there is good evidence they are learning their steps Nurse!
Last edited: