Adding the clinical framing, because it changes how the question reads. The distinction that resolves most of these threads is between what is true on average and what is true for one person. Both are real; they answer different questions and get quoted as if they were the same one.
Dr.RenalNash said:The distinction that resolves most of these threads is between what is true on average and what is true for one person.
Adding a me-too, because a thread of one person's experience is not much use. I had assumed I was the exception until I read this.
Dr.RenalNash said:The distinction that resolves most of these threads is between what is true on average and what is true for one person.
There is a second half to this that has not been said yet. 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.
Community-driven peptide testing and vendor rating platform. Transparent results. Unbiased analysis. Trusted by thousands.
View ResultsOne concrete data point for the thread. 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.
Ask again with the specifics and you will get a better answer than this one.
Following on from Dr.RenalNash — and this may be the naive question:
Was that from a primary source or from a summary of one?