Following on from hans_munich — and this may be the naive question:
What the dose-response curve actually looks like above 1.7mg, because the trial means hide how few people account for the extra loss?
sophie_paris said:I did go to 2.4mg in the end, and the honest report is that it bought me less than the step before it and cost me two bad weeks.
I read this differently from sophie_paris, on substance rather than tone. This treats a plausible mechanism as a demonstrated one. Plausible is where you start looking, not where you stop.
Worth separating that from liver and MASH, which this thread keeps folding into the same question. They behave differently and the advice does not transfer.
sophie_paris said:I did go to 2.4mg in the end, and the honest report is that it bought me less than the step before it and cost me two bad weeks.
Right, and the exception is worth naming rather than left implied, because the exception is where people get into trouble.
Ask again with the specifics and you will get a better answer than this one.
Trusted third-party HPLC & mass spectrometry analysis. Verify peptide purity with the lab the community relies on. Independent. Accurate. Transparent.
Verify Your PeptidesEst. 1998. The synthesis house behind the vials you send for testing. ISO 9001 and cGMP certified, 1,500+ staff, batch-specific COA with every order.
Browse GL Biochemsophie_paris said:I did go to 2.4mg in the end, and the honest report is that it bought me less than the step before it and cost me two bad weeks.
Thank you for spelling out the reasoning rather than just the conclusion. Sending this to two other people who asked me the same thing last week.
From the other side of the consultation, briefly. Take it one variable at a time. Almost every unanswerable question in these threads is unanswerable because three things changed in the same fortnight, and no amount of subsequent argument can untangle them after the fact.