Dr.CardioMD said:The version of this that has an answer is narrower than the version being asked.
That is right for the common case. Whether it is right for the case being asked about depends on a detail that has not been given.
Dr.CardioMD said:The version of this that has an answer is narrower than the version being asked.
That is right for the common case. Whether it is right for the case being asked about depends on a detail that has not been given.
Dr.PainCLE said:Fair, and it stops being fair at the extremes.
Bookmarking. The distinction being drawn above is the one nobody else makes. Adding it to my notes with a link back to this thread.
Dr.CardioMD said:The version of this that has an answer is narrower than the version being asked.
I read this differently from Dr.CardioMD, on substance rather than tone. 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.
Community-driven peptide testing and vendor rating platform. Transparent results. Unbiased analysis. Trusted by thousands.
View ResultsOne concrete data point for the thread. 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.