lucas_SP_BR said:

Give anything pharmacological four weeks before you judge it, and give anything measured weekly a four-point rolling average before you call it a…

Pushing back on lucas_SP_BR here. I think the framing smuggles in the conclusion. Ask it the other way round and the obvious answer reverses, which usually means the question is doing the work.

lucas_SP_BR said:

Give anything pharmacological four weeks before you judge it, and give anything measured weekly a four-point rolling average before you call it a…

True, with the qualification that this is a self-selected group. The people for whom it did not work post less, and that shapes everything we think we know.

lucas_SP_BR said:

Give anything pharmacological four weeks before you judge it, and give anything measured weekly a four-point rolling average before you call it a…

Genuinely useful, thank you. I had the facts and not the framework. Adding it to my notes with a link back to this thread.

Adding the clinical framing, because it changes how the question reads. 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.

LindaRN_retired said:

Almost every unanswerable question in these threads is unanswerable because three things changed in the same fortnight, and no amount of subsequent…

Same experience, arrived at from the opposite direction. I had assumed I was the exception until I read this.