Someone talk me out of this.
Rodent study. Always a rodent study. I’m not saying that makes it worthless, I’m saying I wish people led with it.
Genuinely open to being corrected on this.
Critical read: the Hexarelin literature is thinner than it looks
17 comments
No replies yet. Be the first to add one.
0
For anyone arriving from search: the compound reference page has the evidence grading, and the testing tab has the actual results. Two different things, easy to conflate.
1
Bumping.
15
Reversed-phase HPLC with UV detection at 214nm is the standard here because the peptide bond absorbs there. If a vendor reports purity without stating the method or wavelength, the number is not comparable to anything.
3
Any update on this?
IN ines_notes ·
Answered your second question in a DM since it was getting long, but short version is yes with caveats.