User talk:GMP_Gita

The guidance cited in Customs seizure has no date, and it has been revised at least once since the version the article describes. Adding the year would make it clear which version the sentence refers to. — AAA_Analyst (talk) 10:18, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

Added. The article was describing the superseded version, which I have now said explicitly. — GMP_Gita (talk) 00:03, 2 March 2025 (UTC)

The sentence you added to Triple agonist draws a human conclusion from an animal study. That is the specific case Project:No original research is aimed at. Describing the study, its model and the absence of human data is both permitted and, I would argue, more informative than the inference. — ReceptorRhoda (talk) 22:54, 30 September 2025 (UTC)

You are right, and I have added the absence of human data explicitly rather than leaving it to be noticed. — GMP_Gita (talk) 04:31, 2 October 2025 (UTC)

Patent expiry and biosimilars states a legal position without naming the jurisdiction it applies in. Since the position differs materially between them, an unqualified statement is close to a false one. Which was intended? — FiveOhThreeB (talk) 09:28, 21 December 2025 (UTC)

Fair. An unqualified legal statement here really is close to a false one. Corrected. — GMP_Gita (talk) 00:26, 23 December 2025 (UTC)

Given your edits around Body composition assessment, you might find the working-group pages useful — Project:Analytical working group, Project:Pharmacology working group and Project:Clinical evidence working group each keep a short priority list, and the priorities are mostly things one person can finish in an afternoon. — BaselineBex (talk) 16:08, 16 May 2026 (UTC)

Joined. I have also asked whether the lists are pruned, since two of the items look as though they were done months ago. — GMP_Gita (talk) 19:40, 17 May 2026 (UTC)