Following on from CarlaRPh_TPA — and this may be the naive question:
What did you change at the same time, and can you separate the two now?
TirzTom said:One habit that pays for itself: post the method alongside the number.
I read this differently from TirzTom, on substance rather than tone. Filing an objection on the n=1 problem. Personal experience is genuine evidence about one person and very weak evidence about anybody else, and this thread keeps promoting the first into the second.
TirzTom said:One habit that pays for itself: post the method alongside the number.
That is right for the common case. Whether it is right for the case being asked about depends on a detail that has not been given.
Community-driven peptide testing and vendor rating platform. Transparent results. Unbiased analysis. Trusted by thousands.
View ResultsTirzTom said:One habit that pays for itself: post the method alongside the number.
Genuinely useful, thank you. I had the facts and not the framework. I will report back once I have actually tried it.
Reporting back.
Following up because I said I would. I changed one thing, left everything else alone, and waited the full interval before looking. It resolved, and I cannot prove which half of that did it.