DataDave said:For anyone reading later: the numbers in this thread are worth checking against a primary source before you act on them, including mine.
Bookmarking. The distinction being drawn above is the one nobody else makes. Taking it to my next appointment.
Clinical perspective, offered as context rather than as advice. 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.
Dr.DermMIA said:Almost every unanswerable question in these threads is unanswerable because three things changed in the same fortnight, and no amount of subsequent…
Can confirm. Same sequence, different timescale. The detail I would add is minor and it is already implied above.
Certified reference materials, analytical reagents, and research-grade standards for peptide verification. Trusted by laboratories worldwide.
Shop Reference StandardsDr.DermMIA said:Almost every unanswerable question in these threads is unanswerable because three things changed in the same fortnight, and no amount of subsequent…
Adding the part of the answer the thread has not reached. Most of what circulates confidently in this community traces back to one summary of one study, and the qualifier was dropped somewhere in the third retelling.
The figures, for anyone assembling their own picture. Say what you would expect to see if you were wrong, before you look. It is a small discipline and it changes what you notice.
Worth separating that from glycaemic control, which this thread keeps folding into the same question. They behave differently and the advice does not transfer.