Adding the numbers, since they settle part of this. Practical: whatever you change, write down the date and the reason. In three months the reason is what you will have forgotten, and the reason is what makes the record worth having.
Following on from PharmD_Rodriguez — and this may be the naive question:
Whether the fasting requirement is as strict in practice as the label implies, and what people actually see when they get it wrong?
BiostatsBrad said:Practical: whatever you change, write down the date and the reason.
Coming at BiostatsBrad’s question from a different direction. 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.
Certified reference materials, analytical reagents, and research-grade standards for peptide verification. Trusted by laboratories worldwide.
Shop Reference StandardsOP back with an update, since a thread like this is useless without one.
Update — I went back to the injectable. Not because the tablet did not work, but because the fasting window and my mornings were never going to agree.
hyun_seoul said: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…
That is correct as far as it goes, and here is where it stops going. The absorption variability is real, but it partly averages out over weeks — the steady-state trough is less erratic than any single day would suggest. Where it bites is in the first fortnight, when people conclude the tablet does nothing.