Found this through search years later and it is still the best discussion of the question, so adding one thing. Keep the original post as written when you update it, and add the correction underneath. An edited-away mistake is invisible to the next person who makes it.
Clinical perspective, offered as context rather than as advice. The mechanism and the magnitude are separate questions. Agreeing that something happens says nothing about whether it happens enough to act on.
Correct me if the detail matters more than I have assumed.
TrialTracker_MD said:The mechanism and the magnitude are separate questions.
Same experience, arrived at from the opposite direction. The detail I would add is minor and it is already implied above.
Certified reference materials, analytical reagents, and research-grade standards for peptide verification. Trusted by laboratories worldwide.
Shop Reference StandardsTrialTracker_MD said:The mechanism and the magnitude are separate questions.
There is a second half to this that has not been said yet. There is a difference between no evidence and evidence of no effect, and this subject is one where the two get swapped freely in both directions.
Correct me if the detail matters more than I have assumed.
Adding the numbers, since they settle part of this. One practical note: write down what you did and when, before you need it. Reconstructing a timeline from memory three months later is how people end up unable to answer the one question that would have resolved it.