One concrete data point for the thread. If you are going to change something, change one thing and give it long enough to express itself. Four weeks is the usual minimum for anything pharmacological on this board, and two weeks of data has told you almost nothing.
Following on from Dr.NutriCornell — and this may be the naive question:
How would you tell the difference between that and the alternative explanation?
hank_denver said:If you are going to change something, change one thing and give it long enough to express itself.
Filing a mild objection. Mild because I might be wrong; an objection because nobody has addressed the case that does not fit. The counter-case has not been addressed. Somebody upthread described the situation that does not fit, and the thread moved on rather than engaging with it, which is the failure mode this board is supposed to avoid.
Community-driven peptide testing and vendor rating platform. Transparent results. Unbiased analysis. Trusted by thousands.
View Resultshank_denver said:If you are going to change something, change one thing and give it long enough to express itself.
Agreed, and the size of the effect matters as much as its existence. Something real and small gets treated here as though it were real and decisive.
hank_denver said:If you are going to change something, change one thing and give it long enough to express itself.
Thank you for spelling out the reasoning rather than just the conclusion.