Real gamble, that. You're injecting something that no regulatory body that said was safe and that that supplier is giving you what they say they are? Just like injecting whatever it is they happen to give you?

If you're doing this sort of thing, usually you batch your orders together (ideally with some friends) and randomly lab test a few vials selected from the large batch you receive. The powder form vials you receive before mixing will last more or less indefinitely in a freezer, so you can order multiple years worth of supply at a time.

The potency and purity are typically pretty good, but from time to time vendors will be outed for either outright fraud or a bad batch that is underfilled or whatnot. Most of the direct vendors (out of China) will guarantee fill and purity, and also give credit on your next order for lab test costs if you share the tests with them for future marketing purposes.

All sorts of risks involved of course, but you can mitigate them fairly effectively. Your risk tolerance may vary. Some folks will buy single vials from US resellers and trust those seller's lab test reports. Others (smartly, imo) don't trust that and do their own testing directly on the product they receive.

Profoundly stupid shit.

Risky. Not necessarily stupid. I wouldn’t do it. But we’d have to observe the injury rate before being able to conclude anything.

No, you can know that decisions are stupid before knowing their outcome. In fact, decisions can be stupid even when they result in a neutral or positive outcome.

What's the experiment?

"Person A takes Foundayo, Person B takes mystery drug?"

Not sure what you think you're learning from that.

Are you asking if we're learning about the general population, or about ourselves? We're 100% identical twins with nearly identical blood work across a fairly deep blood panel. We're learning precisely what we need to know to maximize efficacy for us.

I'm saying that the "retatrutide" test subject has no way to access known-good retatrutide.