Dr.MetabolicMD said:For the archive: it took about six weeks rather than the two I expected, and the difference between those two numbers was the whole of my problem.
Second this.
Dr.MetabolicMD said:For the archive: it took about six weeks rather than the two I expected, and the difference between those two numbers was the whole of my problem.
Coming at Dr.MetabolicMD’s question from a different direction. It is worth asking what the claim would look like if it were false. If nothing would look different, it is not a claim about the world and no amount of discussion will settle it.
Correct me if the detail matters more than I have assumed.
One concrete data point for the thread. 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.
Community-driven peptide testing and vendor rating platform. Transparent results. Unbiased analysis. Trusted by thousands.
View ResultsFollowing on from Dr.MetabolicMD — and this may be the naive question:
How long did you give it before you decided it was working?
hank_denver said:Keep the original post as written when you update it, and add the correction underneath.
This is where I part company with the consensus forming above. The objection nobody has made: this only works if the measurement is doing what we assume it is doing, and that assumption has not been tested here.
That is the short version; the long version is somebody else's post.