Nov 14, 2025 at 10:19 AM#16
Dr.GastroMayo said:Worth answering the question that was asked rather than the one behind it.
Mine went the same way, slower.
Last edited: Nov 14, 2025 at 4:19 PM
10 8tane_welly, Dr.PathRoch, mona_PHX and 7 others
Reply Quote Save Share Report
Nov 14, 2025 at 8:22 PM#17
wendy_avl 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…
True, with the qualification that this is a self-selected group. The people for whom it did not work post less, and that shapes everything we think we know.
11 9carl_compliance, DanielChem_CHI, marco_milano and 8 others
Reply Quote Save Share Report
Nov 15, 2025 at 6:25 AM#18
wendy_avl 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…
That reframing is the part I needed.
12 10HPLC_Greg, LibrarianMeg, bri_stats and 9 others
Reply Quote Save Share Report
Sigma-Aldrich — Research-Grade Standards
Certified reference materials, analytical reagents, and research-grade standards for peptide verification. Trusted by laboratories worldwide.
Shop Reference StandardsNov 15, 2025 at 4:28 PM#19
Adding the clinical framing, because it changes how the question reads. 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.
Last edited: Nov 15, 2025 at 9:28 PM
13 11Dr.PulmRoch, maya_sedona, stefan_berlin and 10 others
Reply Quote Save Share Report