Skip to the arithmetic
Dosing ArithmeticVial yield and repeat-interval arithmetic, on figures you supply.

What this does not do

The name of this domain points at the question this site will not answer. That deserves more than a footnote, so it gets the longest page here.

Educational arithmetic only. Not medical advice and not a dosing protocol.

What the name of this domain implies

This site is reached at a domain containing the word dosing, and it is published as Dosing Arithmetic because that is what it does: the arithmetic that surrounds a repeated amount. How many whole amounts a vial contains. What span a number of draws covers at an interval you supply. What a half-life you supply implies when an amount repeats at an interval you also supply.

Every one of those takes every figure from the reader. Nothing here states what quantity is appropriate for anyone, and there is no function in it that produces an amount to administer.

That is structural rather than a policy applied on top. The calculation engine behind this site holds no compound data, has no model of a person, and contains no function that accepts a person, a goal, a weight or a condition and returns a quantity. Every entry point requires the figures to be supplied and then converts between representations of what was supplied. Arithmetic on figures somebody else chose is a converter, and a converter cannot recommend.

An interval is a parameter, never a proposal

Two families of page here sweep an interval across a range of values: six interval pages and a column on every half-life page. Those are parameters, chosen to make the shape of a function visible across the range it is useful over. None of them is presented as common, typical, standard or appropriate, and no page here says how often anything should happen.

The same applies to the half-life values. Ten of them appear, spaced across the range published figures for peptides fall in, and not one is attributed to any substance. A page about a 24-hour half-life is a page about the number 24, and it says so.

No page here states a frequency, a schedule, a route, a duration or a per-kilogram figure for anyone, and no page describes how to prepare or administer anything. The arithmetic of a volume is not an instruction to draw it, and a geometric series evaluated at a spacing is not a plan.

Medical advice is not what this is

This is educational arithmetic on figures entered by the reader. It is not medical advice, not a dosing protocol, and not a recommendation that anything be prepared, obtained or administered. Nothing on this site is medical, clinical or pharmaceutical advice, and nothing here is a substitute for it.

A question about anyone’s health belongs with a licensed clinician who can examine the person asking. A decision about anybody's health taken on the strength of a page here is taken against the explicit advice of this notice.

The accumulation model in particular is a single-compartment first-order model with four assumptions in it, none of which holds exactly for a subcutaneously administered peptide: instantaneous availability, a constant proportional elimination rate, identical repeats, and nothing changing between them. Absorption, distribution, protein binding, active metabolites and variation between individuals are all excluded. A figure from that model is a statement about the model.

No compound is named anywhere on this site

There is no compound data here of any kind: no names, no molar masses, no potencies, no published half-lives. The vials on these pages are described by two numbers, and the half-lives by one.

Where a worksheet needs a figure from outside, it asks for it and says what kind of source it belongs to. A built-in table of half-lives would drop the species, the formulation, the route and the assay that each figure belongs to and keep only the number, which is how a measurement becomes a claim.

Compounds of the kind this arithmetic is used on are largely research chemicals that are not approved by the FDA for human use.

Nothing is recommended and nothing is sold

This site does not recommend that any substance be purchased, imported, possessed, prepared or administered, by anyone, for any purpose. No supplier, vendor, pharmacy or compounder is named, ranked, linked or implied anywhere on it, and there is no route from any page here to buying anything.

What is lawful to possess, import, supply or administer differs between jurisdictions and changes over time. Nothing here is an assurance that anything described is lawful where a reader is, and nothing here is legal advice.

Where the precision stops meaning accuracy

An exact calculation is not an accurate measurement: what is actually in a syringe depends on the preparation and the device, neither of which this page can see.

This site does two kinds of arithmetic and labels both. The vial arithmetic is exact: quantities are held as fractions of whole numbers and rounded once, at the point of display. The kinetic arithmetic cannot be exact, because the exponent is fractional, so it is computed in floating point and every figure it produces is labelled approximate. Which is which is set out on the background page about exactness.

A third category sits between them. A strength derived from a mass and a diluent volume is exact arithmetic on a denominator that is too small, because the dissolved solid takes up room. That figure is labelled an upper bound and every volume derived from it a lower bound, because the uncertainty has a known direction and hiding it would be worse than stating it.

None of that precision says anything about whether a vial contains what its label claims, whether a solid dissolved fully, whether a barrel matches its own printing, or whether a figure was read correctly off it.

Review, and the absence of it

No qualified clinical reviewer is recorded against this site, and no credential is claimed anywhere on it. The arithmetic is covered by an automated test suite and by mutation testing, which introduces deliberate defects into the engine one at a time and fails if the tests do not catch each one. That is evidence about software rather than clinical review, and the two are not substitutes.

No contributor is presented as a physician, pharmacist, chemist or researcher, because none is. No byline, qualification, affiliation or certification appears anywhere on this site, and none is claimed in its structured data.

What happens when something here is wrong

An arithmetic result that can be shown to be wrong is a defect, and the test suite exists so that such a defect fails the build rather than reaching a reader. A table cell that disagrees with the worksheet that should have produced it is the same kind of defect, and is why every table here is generated rather than typed.

The site is offered as it stands, with no warranty of accuracy, completeness or fitness for any purpose. Anyone relying on a figure here for anything that matters should check it independently, which is why every worksheet shows its derivation.