LindaRN_retired said:It is worth asking what the claim would look like if it were false.
No disagreement, though it depends on where somebody is starting from, and this thread has been assuming a starting point nobody stated.
LindaRN_retired said:It is worth asking what the claim would look like if it were false.
No disagreement, though it depends on where somebody is starting from, and this thread has been assuming a starting point nobody stated.
DerekSJ_a1c said:Hormone panel changes on the hormone panel — relevant for anyone curious about endocrine effects: Testosterone: increased 28% (weight loss reduces…
Genuinely useful, thank you. I had the facts and not the framework. Printing the relevant bit and taking it with me.
LindaRN_retired said:It is worth asking what the claim would look like if it were false.
This is where I part company with the consensus forming above. Pushing back on the consensus forming here. Consistency is not the same as correctness, and a board that agrees with itself quickly is usually agreeing with the first person who sounded certain.
Community-driven peptide testing and vendor rating platform. Transparent results. Unbiased analysis. Trusted by thousands.
View ResultsThe 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.
Moderator note: leaving this open. It is being argued well and the disagreement is the useful part. Thread quality here is what the rules are for. Keep it up.