Dr.RaviCardio said:

If you are comparing against somebody else’s result, check that you are comparing the same measurement taken the same way.

I read this differently from Dr.RaviCardio, on substance rather than tone. The counter-case has not been addressed. Somebody upthread described the situation that does not fit, and the thread moved on rather than engaging with it, which is the failure mode this board is supposed to avoid.

Dr.RaviCardio said:

If you are comparing against somebody else’s result, check that you are comparing the same measurement taken the same way.

Agreed on the substance. I would put less weight on the timescale, because two months of anything is not enough to distinguish a trend from a wobble.

Dr.RaviCardio said:

If you are comparing against somebody else’s result, check that you are comparing the same measurement taken the same way.

Genuinely useful, thank you. I had the facts and not the framework. I will report back once I have actually tried it.

From the other side of the consultation, briefly. Worth answering the question that was asked rather than the one behind it. The narrow version usually has an answer; the broad version usually does not, and answering the broad one is how a thread stops being useful.

TrialTracker_MD said:

Worth answering the question that was asked rather than the one behind it.

This is my experience too, for whatever a second data point is worth. Posting only so the count is not one.