Clinical perspective, offered as context rather than as advice. 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.
Dr.NephBHM_UK said:Worth answering the question that was asked rather than the one behind it.
This is my experience too, for whatever a second data point is worth. Nothing to add that would improve it.
Dr.NephBHM_UK said:Worth answering the question that was asked rather than the one behind it.
Adding the part of the answer the thread has not reached. It helps to ask what evidence would change your mind before you look at any. If nothing would, the discussion is not about evidence, and it is better to say so early than to spend nine posts discovering it.
Ask again with the specifics and you will get a better answer than this one.
Community-driven peptide testing and vendor rating platform. Transparent results. Unbiased analysis. Trusted by thousands.
View ResultsAdding the numbers, since they settle part of this. If you are comparing against somebody else’s result, check that you are comparing the same measurement taken the same way. Most of the apparent contradictions in these threads dissolve at that step.
Following on from Dr.NephBHM_UK — and this may be the naive question:
How would you tell the difference between that and the alternative explanation?