slopfront
preferences

u/PreparedForZombies

264 post karma · 35.0k comment karma · joined Oct 2011

PreparedForZombies 2 points · 24d ago

Straight diabolical.

PreparedForZombies 2 points · 24d ago

Check that profile - hitting hard.

To each, her/his own... That person''s body, that person's choice.

PreparedForZombies 1 points · 29d ago

Hmmm, that diet change shouldn't have sent your labs sideways.

Most of the data comes from HIV-associated abdominal lipodystrophy trials, so extrapolating to other subjects is understandably less certain... Most of benefit comes from lower visceral fat in regards to lipids.

Triglycerides: Usually decrease, and the drop tends to be larger when baseline TG is elevated. Trials showed reductions on the order of tens of mg/dL vs placebo.

Total cholesterol and non-HDL: Modest decreases in trials, and total cholesterol/HDL ratio improved.

LDL-C: Generally neutral.

HDL-C: Same, litle to no consistent change.

Losing a lot of weight? Or gaining? Both will mess up lipids temporarily.

Other meds or supplements? Alcohol use?

Bad sleep shouldn't cause it (but obviously sucks for all outcomes). Will back that statement up with AI summaries...

O'Keeffe et al., J Sleep Res 2013: Five nights of 4 h versus 9 h sleep in young, normal-weight adults on controlled feeding showed no effect on lipid profile.

Kerkhofs et al., 2007: This is the study behind the "sleep loss raises cholesterol" claim. Total and LDL cholesterol rose in post-menopausal women after 3 nights of 4h in bed compared to 8h. It was small and short, in an older population.

Aho et al., Sci Rep 2016: Insufficient sleep was linked to lower large HDL in population cohorts, while circulating LDL actually decreased in the experimental sleep restriction arm. It also found shifts in cholesterol transporter and inflammatory gene expression.

6-week crossover trial (PubMed 37815115): Seventy-eight adults restricted sleep by 1.5 h/night for six weeks. HDL rose slightly (about 1.2 mg/dL), and effects on total cholesterol and LDL-C differed by sex and menopausal status.

PreparedForZombies 1 points · 29d ago

Literally got into a back-and-forth over the same exact situation, trying to back up the person who said someone couldn't read... and it turns out they themselves could not read, lol

https://www.reddit.com/r/careeradvice/comments/1wpzycw/comment/pc0by5v/?context=3

PreparedForZombies 1 points · Aug 2026

Young men or the rest of the population? That's where the data gets nuanced... for showing COVID caused more cardiac issues then the vax:

  1. Patone et al., Circulation (2022) — Self-controlled case series of 42.8 million people in England. Found the risk of myocarditis is greater after SARS-CoV-2 infection than after COVID-19 vaccination, and remains modest after sequential mRNA doses. PubMed

  2. CDC/PCORnet, MMWR (2022) — Multi-health-system US study. Cardiac complications after infection or mRNA vaccination were low overall, but higher after infection than after vaccination for both sexes and all age groups. CDC

  3. Spanish tertiary hospital cohort (2024) — Found pericarditis/myocarditis incidence was about 40-fold higher in COVID-19 patients than in those exposed to an mRNA vaccine. ScienceDirect

  4. Systematic review/meta-analysis cited by Pfizer — Found myocarditis risk after COVID-19 infection is roughly 42 times higher than after vaccination. Pfizer

  5. Swedish nationwide cohort, European Heart Journal (2025) — Myopericarditis risk was transiently increased after mRNA vaccination, but full vaccination substantially reduced the risk of several more severe COVID-associated cardiovascular outcomes. Oxford Academic

  6. Cambridge/Bristol/Edinburgh study, Nature Communications — Analyzed 46 million adults in England. Heart attack and stroke incidence was up to 10-27% lower in the weeks after vaccination than before/without vaccination. University of Cambridge

  7. UK Biobank study, NIH/NHLBI (2024) — In unvaccinated first-wave patients, COVID-19 doubled cardiovascular event risk overall, and nearly quadrupled it in severe cases, persisting up to three years post-infection. National Institutes of Health

Some meta-analyses show mixed signals for specific outcomes (e.g., coronary artery disease after certain doses), so the literature isn't perfectly uniform, but the myocarditis comparison consistently favors vaccination over infection.

Now this is where it gets interesting... The data becomes a lot more interesting when looking at populations of young men (not that way, perv):

  1. Patone et al., Circulation (2022) — Same UK cohort as before, but stratified by age/sex. Found the risk of myocarditis after vaccination is higher in younger men, particularly after a second dose of the Moderna (mRNA-1273) vaccine AHA Journals — the one exception to the overall "infection is worse" pattern.

  2. British Columbia Cohort Study, CMAJ — 10.2 million mRNA vaccine doses; found significantly more myocarditis cases than expected — 99 observed vs. 7 expected within 7 days, and 141 vs. 20 expected within 21 days — especially after Moderna's second dose in young men. CIDRAP

  3. Spanish tertiary hospital cohort (2024) — Same study as before, but notably: the most frequent cause of pericarditis/myocarditis in adolescent patients specifically was mRNA COVID-19 vaccination, not infection. ScienceDirect

  4. Re-analysis of FDA's Moderna Benefit-Risk Assessment, 2024 (arXiv preprint, not peer-reviewed) — Reanalyzing the FDA's own framework for 18–25-year-old males with more granular assumptions. Found vaccine-attributable myocarditis/pericarditis caused 16–63% more hospitalizations than the vaccine prevented from COVID in that group, under realistic Omicron-era infection assumptions. arxiv This directly contradicts the FDA's official conclusion, so treat it as a contested finding, not consensus.

  5. American College of Cardiology review, 2022 — States plainly that "the one exception is younger males" — during the mid-teen years, vaccine-associated myocarditis risk appears to significantly exceed post-infection myocarditis risk. American College of Cardiology

  6. Stanford Medicine (2025) — Mechanistic study, not a risk comparison, but relevant: found vaccine-associated myocarditis incidence peaks in male vaccinees age 30 or under, at roughly 1 in 16,750. Stanford Medicine

Summary for the second half: Nearly every major public-health body (WHO, ACC, CDC) that found elevated vaccine risk in young men still concluded the benefits outweighed the risks population-wide, because COVID hospitalization/death, even if rare, was judged to outweigh mostly-mild, self-resolving vaccine myocarditis. The #4 arXiv paper is the sharpest outlier — it directly disputes that conclusion for one narrow group (males 18–25) — but it's a preprint, not peer-reviewed, so it carries less weight than the published cohort studies.

PreparedForZombies 1 points · Aug 2026

Come over to some of the more friendly subs that talk about body hacking if you want to...

PreparedForZombies 11 points · Aug 2026

I really wish others would zoom out more... Prefer their safe and snug echo chambers I suppose.

PreparedForZombies 9 points · Aug 2026

Human studies

Melanotan I / afamelanotide — the only one with real clinical development

  • Langendonk et al., NEJM 2015;373:48-59 — two multicenter RCTs (EU n=74, US n=94), double-blind, placebo-controlled, 16 mg SC implant q60d. Significantly more pain-free sunlight exposure in erythropoietic protoporphyria (EPP).
  • Well tolerated; most common AEs were headache and implant-site reactions. No drug-related serious adverse events in the CUV039 phase III.
  • Approved EU 2014, FDA October 2019 as Scenesse — prescription implant, EPP only. Not approved for tanning anywhere.
  • Also studied in vitiligo and other photodermatoses.

Melanotan II — never completed formal development

  • Dorr et al., Life Sci 1996 — tiny phase I pilot. Nausea at every dose level tested. The erection response was an unexpected finding here.
  • Wessells et al., J Urol 1998;160:389-393 — 10 men, psychogenic ED, DB placebo crossover. 8/10 developed clinically apparent erections; mean tip rigidity >80% was 38 min vs 3 min on placebo (p=0.0045). Side effects: nausea, stretching/yawning, reduced appetite.
  • Wessells et al., Int J Impot Res 2000;12(Suppl 4):S74-9 — 20 men. Erection in 17/20 without sexual stimulation; increased desire after 68% of MT-II doses vs 19% placebo. At 0.025 mg/kg, 12.9% had severe nausea.
  • No phase II or III was ever run. Never submitted for approval. The program pivoted to bremelanotide (PT-141), which became Vyleesi — FDA-approved 2019 for HSDD.
  • Bottom line: total human exposure in controlled MT-II research is roughly a few dozen subjects, all short-term, none for tanning endpoints.

Safety literature

  • Habbema et al., Int J Dermatol 2017;56:975-980 — review of unregulated MT-I/MT-II use. Recurrent findings: changes in existing moles, eruptive and dysplastic nevi. Four case reports of melanoma arising in moles during or shortly after use. Non-dermatologic reports include sympathomimetic toxidrome and posterior reversible encephalopathy syndrome (PRES).
  • Hjuler & Lorentzen, 2014 — melanoma in a 20-year-old Fitzpatrick II woman after a 3-4 week MT-II course combined with sunbeds.
  • Nelson et al., Clin Toxicol 2012;50(10) — 39M injected 6 mg (6x his own starting dose). HR peaked at 146, rhabdomyolysis with CPK ~17,773, acute kidney injury, 3 days in ICU. The vial was mass-spec confirmed as actual MT-II, so this was dose, not adulterant.
  • Priapism reported (Dreyer et al., 2019).
  • Hadeler et al., JAAD 2022 — observational study of online-sold alpha-MSH analogs: inconsistent labeling, contamination, compound misidentification.
  • Regulatory: not approved by FDA, EMA, TGA, or MHRA. Banned for sale in Australia; FDA has prosecuted US sellers.

Honest caveats

  • Melanoma causality is not established. These are case reports, heavily confounded by concurrent sunbed use, and the denominator (total users) is unknown. Mechanistically plausible, not proven.
  • Scenesse trial safety data does not transfer to gray-market "MT-1" powder — different purity, sterility, dose accuracy, and route.
  • Most severe events involve dosing errors on self-reconstituted powder.
  • Baseline dermatology mole mapping before use, and annual checks after, is the one thing nearly every published author agrees on.

Edit - apologies for upsetting the mods, point heard. I was trying to show the actual study data, with sources provided, because I believed it would add to the conversation. My mistake.

PreparedForZombies 1 points · Jul 2026

Seems like your AI answer took a real physiological mechanism (MC4R/a-MSH satiety signaling) and bolted on a much shakier, single-hypothesis claim about Semax specifically, then presented the whole thing with the full confidence of settled science. It's a plausible mechanism worth being curious about, but extremely important to note that it is not a demonstrated/proven one.

The MC4R-antagonist idea does exist in the peer-reviewed literature, but it's much softer than "scientific studies have shown." One rodent neurochemistry paper proposes that Semax's mechanism may involve antagonism of melanocortin MC4 receptors affecting monoaminergic neurotransmission - and that paper's actual finding was about striatal serotonin/dopamine turnover, not appetite. It's a hypothesis floated to explain a different result, not a study that set out to characterize Semax as an MC4R binder. https://www.academia.edu/29170397/Semax_An_ACTH_4_10_Analogue_with_Nootropic_Properties_Activates_Dopaminergic_and_Serotoninergic_Brain_Systems_in_Rodents

From my searching and understanding, it's all anecdotal; some report Semax drives appetite up, others report it going down. That cuts against a clean "blocks the satiety switch" story... a true, potent MC4R antagonist (like AgRP) tends to produce fairly reliable hyperphagia in studies, not a coin-flip of more/less hunger across users.

https://superpower.com/guides/semax - "Less common but reported or theoretically relevant: Appetite changes (reported anecdotally; not systematically characterized in published trials)"

TL;DR - I don't believe Semax usage is going to drive up the appetite of everyone, and the science isn't as clear-cut as your LLM presented it... I honestly feel this comes down to one of those "everyone responds differently" situations.

PreparedForZombies 1 points · Jul 2026

Same supplier? If you're saying you can't hit the right dose, can you mention what doses you're trying and what your current height/weight/activity level/etc are?

PreparedForZombies 1 points · Jul 2026

$320 shipped for 60mgx10

PreparedForZombies 1 points · Jul 2026

Agree, wasn't trying to compare, just that I did dig into things.

The pacing thing is absurd with the cop saying he could accurately pace a ~1MPH difference. But, IF that person was actually going 1MPH over, odds are his/her speedo actually showed a higher speed.

For the US (unlike highly regulated EU/UK/etc), manufacturers follow the voluntary SAE J1226 standard (https://www.sae.org/standards/j1226_201108-electric-speedometer-specification-road), which allows an error of up to 4% of the highest reading on the speedometer scale above 55 mph. Edmunds states it pretty clear: at 60 mph the speedometer should read no more than about 1.5 mph off in either direction under that standard, though in practice it's almost always biased high, never low.

Used an LLM to compile this (can't get it to render right, but hopefully it helps make the point):

| Brand group | Typical over-read at highway speed | Notes |

|---|---|---|

| VW Group (VW, Audi, Porsche mainstream models) | ~5% high | Forum-reported consistent across VW/Audi/Porsche sedans and SUVs for over 20 years; dedicated sports car platforms (911, etc.) are close to spot-on |

| BMW | ~4-6% high | Widely reported in owner forums as similarly optimistic to VW Group; several 2014-2016 3-series/4-series owners clocked ~6-7% high at 70 mph |

| GM / Ford / Stellantis (domestic) | ~2-4% high | Generally milder bias than German luxury brands, closer to the SAE J1226 floor |

| Toyota / Honda / Hyundai-Kia | ~2-4% high | Similar to domestics, some newer EVs with GPS-fused speed readouts report near 0% error |

German cars are always going to read considerably higher due to ECE R39... a speedometer must never under read/report. It's legally allowed to read as high as 110% of actual speed + 4 km/h (UK uses +6.25 mph in the equivalent calc).

PreparedForZombies 2 points · Jul 2026

1) For me, Reta raises resting HR more than the other GLP1 agonists I have tried.

2) For me, my anxiety is worse when my HR goes up. Doesn't help to have a congrntial heart defect with two open heart surgeries (cleared by doctors though, was more structural).

3) For me, when I'm anxious, my HR goes up higher... You see the problem here if you circle back to point #2.

PreparedForZombies 1 points · Jul 2026

A voice of reason. Comments like the one you responded to hurt my soul with the amount of willful ignorance involved... yes, human drivers crash too, but stating, "it will be way safer than humans when majority of vehicles are fully autonomous" is absolutely WILD with the current state of the technology.

Just a quick search without much effort (but if you close your eyes, you never have to deal with realities like this):

Had to cut the list down since I got the error "Comment cannot exceed 10000 characters."

Hopefully I made my point.

PreparedForZombies -1 points · Jun 2026

Outside the US you could use something like...

PreparedForZombies -1 points · Jun 2026

If you think this has any chance in passing (or anything like it), you may be disabled. 🤪

PreparedForZombies 1 points · Jun 2026

AI slop with b sources and actual info sinxe I looked this up earlier:

Fidelity — 15-day window (shortest of the group, half FINRA's 30-day standard). Penalties escalate: - 1st flip → 6-month IPO ban - 2nd flip → 1-year ban - 3rd flip → permanent ban tied to your SSN

First clean sell day is the 16th calendar day after it starts trading.

SoFi — 30-day window, harshest ladder: - 1st → 180-day ban - 2nd → 365-day ban - 3rd → permanent ban - Plus a possible $50 fee on any sale before the 120th day

Robinhood — 30-day window, most forgiving: one flat 60-day timeout from IPO Access, no escalation for repeat offenses.

E*Trade — 30-day preference period, vaguest terms. No fixed penalty; "reserves the right" to exclude flippers from future deals.

Public (not a SpaceX broker, but FYI) — 90-day window, reduced or restricted future allocations.

These windows and penalties are set by each broker, not by regulators. FINRA defines flipping as a sale within 30 days, but the punishment is the broker's call — which is why Fidelity can go as short as 15 days and as far as a lifetime ban.

Sources: - Fidelity, "SpaceX IPO explained" — fidelity.com/learning-center/trading-investing/spacex-ipo-explained - Robinhood IPO Access — robinhood.com/us/en/support/articles/how-to-sign-up-for-ipo-access - Yahoo Finance, "Fidelity's SpaceX flipping rule… shorter lock than Robinhood or SoFi" (June 2026) - Yahoo Finance, "SpaceX IPO: Brokers Threaten to Ban Share Flippers" (June 2026)

PreparedForZombies 1 points · Jun 2026

Price? Payment method?

PreparedForZombies 1 points · May 2026

IL (Illinois) - Car dealer threatening repossession on a CASH purchase because I took the car but refused to sign the paperwork.

NAL, but that should be the title... no signatures, no sale IMO - by definition both parties have literally not formally agreed to the contract.

PreparedForZombies 1 points · Apr 2026

1) Mods don't represent your "home state" - don't get so worked up.

2) I think just because something is national doesn't make it relevant to hyper-local subs (but naming the local companies involved does, so this article is neat but just the tip of the iceberg of info).

3) Here's some additional info that goes way above and beyond the article...

Key Contributors & Locations

Company Location Role & Contribution
RDF Corp. Hudson Manufactured hundreds of temperature sensors for the SLS and Orion. They even built a specialized "cryo lab" to test parts under the extreme cold of deep space.
Haigh-Farr Bedford Designed and manufactured the communication antennas (wraparound style) used for flight termination, GPS metric tracking, and telemetry.
Nanocomp Technologies Merrimack Produced Miralon, a specialized carbon nanotube material used in heat shields and lightweight structural components to protect against extreme reentry temperatures.
L3Harris Londonderry Provided over 100 critical elements, including the audio communication system connecting the crew to Mission Control and avionics for the rocket's propulsion.
Turbocam Barrington Developed and manufactured 10 specific turbomachinery parts for the RS-25 main engines that power the SLS core stage.
Creare Hanover Contributed specialized cryogenic cooling systems and electronics to manage thermal stability for onboard instruments.
BAE Systems Nashua Provided mission-critical radiation-hardened electronics and flight control components designed to survive the harsh environment beyond low Earth orbit.
Mikrolar Hampton Supplied high-precision hexapod positioning systems used in the assembly and alignment of the spacecraft’s optical and structural components.
Eaton Belmont* (Aerospace Division) Provided critical fluid conveyance systems and seals for the rocket's propulsion and life-support architecture.

The Remaining Supporters:

The additional companies making up the 18-member group primarily serve as sub-contractors providing high-precision machining, specialized testing, and raw material processing. These include:

  • Jewell Instruments (Manchester): Known for providing inertial sensors and tiltmeters used in ground support and launchpad stability.
  • Kontron (formerly in NH): Has provided ruggedized computing boards for data processing.
  • New England Airfoil Products (Farmington): Involved in precision engine components.
  • Transupport (Merrimack): Aviation and aerospace logistics and spare parts supply.

Fun Fact:

These companies are part of the NH Aerospace and Defense Consortium, which highlights that New Hampshire receives more NASA funding per capita than many larger states due to its density of high-tech manufacturing.

Some Sauce:

PreparedForZombies 1 points · Mar 2026

In this post - "I didn't buy options"

Also in this post - "Shorted Rigetti near its highs"

PreparedForZombies 1 points · Feb 2026

I get what they’re saying, but that explanation is oversimplified and not really accurate. Anastrozole doesn’t “protect” testosterone, it just blocks aromatization, and estrogen isn’t something you automatically want to suppress. Estradiol is essential for libido, mood, bone density, and cardiovascular health, and routine AI use without labs or symptoms is increasingly discouraged. Most guidelines recommend adjusting dose or injection frequency first, because big peaks from infrequent injections are what usually drive estrogen spikes. Using an AI by default can easily push E2 too low, which causes joint pain, fatigue, sexual dysfunction, and lipid issues. That’s why many endocrinologists now view prophylactic AI use as outdated rather than best practice.

Enclomiphene also isn’t a magic shield against shutdown. While it can stimulate LH and FSH and may help preserve some intratesticular testosterone or aid recovery after stopping TRT, it does not prevent HPTA suppression while you’re actively on exogenous testosterone, and it does not guarantee an easy or consequence-free discontinuation. Stopping TRT still commonly results in a period of low testosterone and symptoms, even with SERMs on board. This is well documented in clinical literature and endocrine guidelines. Good references on this include the Endocrine Society Clinical Practice Guideline on Testosterone Therapy (2018), reviews in The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism on aromatase inhibitor use in men, and fertility/HPTA discussions in Urology and Fertility and Sterility.

In short, that stack may reduce certain side effects for some people, but saying there are “no detriments” to stopping or that it fully preserves natural production just isn’t supported by the evidence... but to each, his own!

PreparedForZombies 8 points · Feb 2026

Once I find a reliable non-bot recommended vendor, I'm going the same path... especially with the tweet from the FDA Friday. Not sure how much longer I'll be able to get my stuff from compounding pharmacies.

PreparedForZombies 1 points · Jan 2026

Dude, learn the difference between plural and possessive. I get English isn't your first language, but don't charge money for this typo'd rubbish.

PreparedForZombies 1 points · Jan 2026

Your wife's boyfriend might, though