newstart_MO said:No disagreement, though it depends on where somebody is starting from, and this thread has been assuming a starting point nobody stated.
Mine went the same way, slower.
newstart_MO said:No disagreement, though it depends on where somebody is starting from, and this thread has been assuming a starting point nobody stated.
Mine went the same way, slower.
newstart_MO said:No disagreement, though it depends on where somebody is starting from, and this thread has been assuming a starting point nobody stated.
Adding the part of the answer the thread has not reached. The honest answer is that the effect is real, the magnitude is contested, and the individual variation is larger than either. Those three things can all be true at once, and most arguments here are two people holding different parts of that.
The figures, for anyone assembling their own picture. Give anything pharmacological four weeks before you judge it, and give anything measured weekly a four-point rolling average before you call it a trend.
Ask again with the specifics and you will get a better answer than this one.
Community-driven peptide testing and vendor rating platform. Transparent results. Unbiased analysis. Trusted by thousands.
View ResultsA narrower follow-up, since the general answer is now clear:
How would you tell the difference between that and the alternative explanation?
Dr.RaviCardio said:Give anything pharmacological four weeks before you judge it, and give anything measured weekly a four-point rolling average before you call it a…
Worth saying that the confident version of this is more useful to the person writing it than to the person reading it.