MeganSA_TX said:Whether it is right for the case being asked about depends on a detail that has not been given.
This is my experience too, for whatever a second data point is worth.
MeganSA_TX said:Whether it is right for the case being asked about depends on a detail that has not been given.
There is a second half to this that has not been said yet. Order of operations matters more than any single choice here: establish a baseline, change one thing, wait long enough for it to express itself, then measure again under the same conditions.
Worth separating that from mood and mental health, which this thread keeps folding into the same question. They behave differently and the advice does not transfer.
Adding the numbers, since they settle part of this. For anyone reading later: the numbers in this thread are worth checking against a primary source before you act on them, including mine. Half the figures circulating in this community trace back to a secondary summary that dropped a qualifier.
Certified reference materials, analytical reagents, and research-grade standards for peptide verification. Trusted by laboratories worldwide.
Shop Reference StandardsOne thing that is still open after MeganSA_TX’s answer:
Was that from a primary source or from a summary of one?
bri_stats said:For anyone reading later: the numbers in this thread are worth checking against a primary source before you act on them, including mine.
I read this differently. The confidence in this thread is running ahead of the evidence, and I would rather the uncertainty were stated than smoothed over because it is unsatisfying.