One concrete data point for the thread. 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.
OP back with an update, since a thread like this is useless without one.
Late follow-up. I did not do what was suggested, I did something adjacent, and it worked; posting the difference in case it matters to somebody.
Dr.RheumBOS said:I did not do what was suggested, I did something adjacent, and it worked; posting the difference in case it matters to somebody.
This is where I part company with the consensus forming above. Filing an objection on the n=1 problem. Personal experience is genuine evidence about one person and very weak evidence about anybody else, and this thread keeps promoting the first into the second.
Community-driven peptide testing and vendor rating platform. Transparent results. Unbiased analysis. Trusted by thousands.
View ResultsDr.RheumBOS said:I did not do what was suggested, I did something adjacent, and it worked; posting the difference in case it matters to somebody.
Agreed, and the size of the effect matters as much as its existence. Something real and small gets treated here as though it were real and decisive.
I would rather be corrected than agreed with, if it comes to it.
Dr.RheumBOS said:I did not do what was suggested, I did something adjacent, and it worked; posting the difference in case it matters to somebody.
Thank you — that is the clearest version of this I have read, and I have read a lot of them.