PharmHunterJen said: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…
Coming at PharmHunterJen’s question from a different direction. The mechanism and the magnitude are separate questions. Agreeing that something happens says nothing about whether it happens enough to act on.
Reporting back.
I stayed at 10mg. Another six months, another 7kg, no new side effects, and my reading of the dose-response says the last two steps were never going to be worth what they cost me.
A narrower follow-up, since the general answer is now clear:
What did you change at the same time, and can you separate the two now?
Certified reference materials, analytical reagents, and research-grade standards for peptide verification. Trusted by laboratories worldwide.
Shop Reference Standardsmarcus_mpls said:Another six months, another 7kg, no new side effects, and my reading of the dose-response says the last two steps were never going to be worth what…
Filing a mild objection. Mild because I might be wrong; an objection because nobody has addressed the case that does not fit. Pushing back on the consensus forming here. Consistency is not the same as correctness, and a board that agrees with itself quickly is usually agreeing with the first person who sounded certain.
marcus_mpls said:Another six months, another 7kg, no new side effects, and my reading of the dose-response says the last two steps were never going to be worth what…
That is correct as far as it goes, and here is where it stops going. Yes, and the corollary is less popular: if the reasoning holds, it also holds where it produces an answer we do not like.
If somebody has the primary source to hand I would rather cite it than paraphrase it.