One concrete data point for the thread. For anyone reading later: the numbers in this thread are worth checking against a primary source before you act on them, including mine. Half the figures circulating in this community trace back to a secondary summary that dropped a qualifier.
Following on from Dr.RheumBOS — and this may be the naive question:
Did your prescriber agree with that reading, and if not what was their objection?
Dr.PulmRoch said:For anyone reading later: the numbers in this thread are worth checking against a primary source before you act on them, including mine.
I read this differently from Dr.PulmRoch, on substance rather than tone. Not convinced. The evidence being cited is consistent with the conclusion and also consistent with two other conclusions nobody has ruled out.
Happy to go further on any of that.
Trusted third-party HPLC & mass spectrometry analysis. Verify peptide purity with the lab the community relies on. Independent. Accurate. Transparent.
Verify Your PeptidesEst. 1998. The synthesis house behind the vials you send for testing. ISO 9001 and cGMP certified, 1,500+ staff, batch-specific COA with every order.
Browse GL BiochemDr.PulmRoch said:For anyone reading later: the numbers in this thread are worth checking against a primary source before you act on them, including mine.
Correct, and worth adding that it is reversible. Nothing being described here is a one-way door, which changes how cautious it is reasonable to be.
Closing the loop on my own question.
Update: I got the sleep and the intake sorted before deciding it was the drug, and most of the flatness went with them. Not all of it, and I am watching the rest.