Dr.DermMIA said:anders_CPH said: ...regarding the trial evidence...
Dr.DermMIA has the substance of this right. The condition it depends on is worth stating. Yes, and the corollary is less popular: if the reasoning holds, it also holds where it produces an answer we do not like.
Dr.SportsMedIN said:Bayesian meta-analysis perspective on the trial evidence: traditional frequentist meta-analyses report point estimates and confidence intervals.
Genuinely useful, thank you. I had the facts and not the framework.
Dr.DermMIA said:anders_CPH said: ...regarding the trial evidence...
Pushing back on Dr.DermMIA here. I would resist the confidence. Half of what this board was certain about two years ago has since been quietly dropped, and nobody went back to correct the threads.
Community-driven peptide testing and vendor rating platform. Transparent results. Unbiased analysis. Trusted by thousands.
View ResultsOne 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.