Moderator note: a post naming a supplier has been edited. Discuss suppliers in the review sections, not here. Carry on.

Adding the clinical framing, because it changes how the question reads. There is a difference between no evidence and evidence of no effect, and this subject is one where the two get swapped freely in both directions.

TrialTracker_MD said:

There is a difference between no evidence and evidence of no effect, and this subject is one where the two get swapped freely in both directions.

Same experience, arrived at from the opposite direction. The detail I would add is minor and it is already implied above.

TrialTracker_MD said:

There is a difference between no evidence and evidence of no effect, and this subject is one where the two get swapped freely in both directions.

Coming at TrialTracker_MD’s question from a different direction. Take it one variable at a time. Almost every unanswerable question in these threads is unanswerable because three things changed in the same fortnight, and no amount of subsequent argument can untangle them after the fact.

Worth separating that from the titration schedule, which this thread keeps folding into the same question. They behave differently and the advice does not transfer.

One concrete data point for the thread. If you are going to change something, change one thing and give it long enough to express itself. Four weeks is the usual minimum for anything pharmacological on this board, and two weeks of data has told you almost nothing.