BrianDallas92 said:I would put less weight on the timescale, because two months of anything is not enough to distinguish a trend from a wobble.
This matches mine closely enough to be worth saying so out loud.
BrianDallas92 said:I would put less weight on the timescale, because two months of anything is not enough to distinguish a trend from a wobble.
This matches mine closely enough to be worth saying so out loud.
BrianDallas92 said:I would put less weight on the timescale, because two months of anything is not enough to distinguish a trend from a wobble.
There is a second half to this that has not been said yet. Take it one variable at a time. Almost every unanswerable question in these threads is unanswerable because three things changed in the same fortnight, and no amount of subsequent argument can untangle them after the fact.
That is the short version; the long version is somebody else's post.
Adding the numbers, since they settle part of this. One practical note: write down what you did and when, before you need it. Reconstructing a timeline from memory three months later is how people end up unable to answer the one question that would have resolved it.
Worth separating that from renal function, which this thread keeps folding into the same question. They behave differently and the advice does not transfer.
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 BiochemFDA_TrackerJim said:One practical note: write down what you did and when, before you need it.
I do not accept the framing. The question has been narrowed to the version that has a tidy answer, and the part that was dropped is the part the OP actually asked about.
If somebody has the primary source to hand I would rather cite it than paraphrase it.