Any guesses?

Bought Cag to research before I buy a kit. Can someone advise on dosing/frequency etc please?

Let's clear up some confusion about batch numbers and why they actually matter for transparency, even when vendors create them internally. Here's the Reality: Batch numbers are typically assigned by the vendor themselves - not some external authority. But before you think "that's meaningless," hear me out on why this is actually part of a solid transparency system. How It Should Work in an Ideal World: The Gold Standard Process: 1. Vendor receives a new shipment of peptides from third-party warehouse/overseas supplier 2. Vendor assigns a new batch number to this shipment 3. Critical step: Vendor tests a sample from this specific batch 4. COA (Certificate of Analysis) is generated with results tied to that batch number 5. Process repeats with every new purchase/shipment What to Look For as a Consumer: ✅ Timeline of updated COAs every 3-6 months ✅ Changing batch numbers over time (this is actually GOOD - it shows ongoing testing) ✅ Fresh test dates that align with batch changes Why Trust Still Matters: Yes, you're putting trust in the vendor to: - Actually test each new batch (not just copy old results) - Use legitimate testing facilities - Accurately report results - Assign new batches when they receive new shipments Red Flags to Watch For: ❌ Same batch number for months/years without change ❌ COAs with dates that don't make sense ❌ Refusing to provide batch-specific documentation ❌ Vague or missing testing information Bottom Line: Batch numbers might be "made up" by vendors, but they serve as a crucial tracking system for quality control. When done right, you should see a pattern of rotating batch numbers with corresponding fresh COAs - this indicates the vendor is continuously testing new inventory rather than riding on old results. The transparency isn't in who creates the batch number - it's in the consistent testing and documentation that follows.

I have done about 3 weeks of retatrutide, and I have not felt this appetite suppression people are talking about like “forcing themselves to eat” I don’t know if I am doing something wrong or what the problem is.

Remember when I said we were just getting started? Well, here we go... PHASE 2: COA ACCOUNTABILITY Just rolled out new standards that are going to separate the real players from the pretenders. Every vendor on peptideprice.store now has to follow one simple rule: COAs must be under 6 months old. Period. Why this is HUGE: - No more recycling old test results - No more "trust me bro" on batch quality - No more cutting corners while you pay full price - Forces real transparency, not just marketing talk Here's what was happening: Rumors were spreading that some companies reorder the same cap colors to avoid testing new batches. Basically gaming the system while customers think they're getting fresh, tested product. My response: October 31st deadline. Comply or get removed. No exceptions. New Policy (Effective Oct 31st): ✅ All COAs must be dated within the last 6 months ✅ Applies to every product on peptideprice.store ✅ If selling batches older than 6 months = retesting required Phase 2 is about ACCOUNTABILITY. Making sure those standards actually mean something. Companies doing things right? This makes them stronger. Companies cutting corners? They're about to find out this isn't the wild west anymore. The industry is changing whether some companies like it or not. I'm just making sure peptideprice.store represents the future, not the past. Read the full email Attached Below 👇 ------------------------------------------ To All Research Companies, I'm reaching out regarding a critical issue that's been brought to my attention by multiple customers and industry contacts. There have been persistent rumors circulating that some companies are reusing old COAs and avoiding batch testing by strategically reordering identical cap and crimp colors to maintain the appearance of consistent inventory. The Issue: I want to be clear—I've had great experiences with all of you and don't believe anyone here is engaging in this practice. However, the concern is real and must be addressed. Customers are worried that companies may be bypassing proper testing protocols to save on the time and expense of retesting new batches. This not only undermines customer trust but also poses real risks, since new batches can vary significantly in purity and net peptide content regardless of packaging.