roxy_nash said:Start from the measurement rather than the conclusion.
This matches mine closely enough to be worth saying so out loud. The detail I would add is minor and it is already implied above.
Following on from LibrarianMeg — and this may be the naive question:
What would you measure differently if you were starting again?
lucas_SP_BR said:Give anything pharmacological four weeks before you judge it, and give anything measured weekly a four-point rolling average before you call it a…
I read this differently from lucas_SP_BR, on substance rather than tone. I think the framing smuggles in the conclusion. Ask it the other way round and the obvious answer reverses, which usually means the question is doing the work.
Community-driven peptide testing and vendor rating platform. Transparent results. Unbiased analysis. Trusted by thousands.
View Resultslucas_SP_BR said:Give anything pharmacological four weeks before you judge it, and give anything measured weekly a four-point rolling average before you call it a…
No disagreement, though the timescale matters more than the mechanism here. Most of what looks like a difference in kind turns out to be a difference in how long somebody waited.
Moderator note: two posts asking for a source have been merged into one. Please search the thread before asking again. Thread quality here is what the rules are for. Keep it up.