quinn_sf 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 it depends on where somebody is starting from, and this thread has been assuming a starting point nobody stated.
Ask again with the specifics and you will get a better answer than this one.
quinn_sf 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…
Thank you for spelling out the reasoning rather than just the conclusion.
Adding the clinical framing, because it changes how the question reads. It is worth asking what the claim would look like if it were false. If nothing would look different, it is not a claim about the world and no amount of discussion will settle it.
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 BiochemDr.ObesityMed said:It is worth asking what the claim would look like if it were false.
Mine went the same way, slower. I had assumed I was the exception until I read this.
Dr.ObesityMed said:It is worth asking what the claim would look like if it were false.
Coming at Dr.ObesityMed’s question from a different direction. The honest answer is that the effect is real, the magnitude is contested, and the individual variation is larger than either. Those three things can all be true at once, and most arguments here are two people holding different parts of that.