stefan_berlin said:For anyone reading later: the numbers in this thread are worth checking against a primary source before you act on them, including mine.
Thank you for spelling out the reasoning rather than just the conclusion.
Adding the clinical framing, because it changes how the question reads. Worth answering the question that was asked rather than the one behind it. The narrow version usually has an answer; the broad version usually does not, and answering the broad one is how a thread stops being useful.
carl_compliance said:Worth answering the question that was asked rather than the one behind it.
Adding a me-too, because a thread of one person's experience is not much use. Posting only so the count is not one.
Community-driven peptide testing and vendor rating platform. Transparent results. Unbiased analysis. Trusted by thousands.
View Resultscarl_compliance said:Worth answering the question that was asked rather than the one behind it.
There is a second half to this that has not been said yet. The distinction that resolves most of these threads is between what is true on average and what is true for one person. Both are real; they answer different questions and get quoted as if they were the same one.
Adding the numbers, since they settle part of this. Say what you would expect to see if you were wrong, before you look. It is a small discipline and it changes what you notice.
Ask again with the specifics and you will get a better answer than this one.