Dr.LipidDallas said:The mechanism and the magnitude are separate questions.
Mine went the same way, slower. The detail I would add is minor and it is already implied above.
Dr.LipidDallas said:The mechanism and the magnitude are separate questions.
Mine went the same way, slower. The detail I would add is minor and it is already implied above.
Dr.LipidDallas said:The mechanism and the magnitude are separate questions.
Coming at Dr.LipidDallas’s question from a different direction. Most of what circulates confidently in this community traces back to one summary of one study, and the qualifier was dropped somewhere in the third retelling.
The figures, for anyone assembling their own picture. Give anything pharmacological four weeks before you judge it, and give anything measured weekly a four-point rolling average before you call it a trend.
Community-driven peptide testing and vendor rating platform. Transparent results. Unbiased analysis. Trusted by thousands.
View ResultsA narrower follow-up, since the general answer is now clear:
How long did you give it before you decided it was working?
josh_phd_bmore 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…
Filing a mild objection. Mild because I might be wrong; an objection because nobody has addressed the case that does not fit. Filing an objection on the n=1 problem. Personal experience is genuine evidence about one person and very weak evidence about anybody else, and this thread keeps promoting the first into the second.