lucas_SP_BR said:Keep the original post as written when you update it, and add the correction underneath.
I read this differently from lucas_SP_BR, on substance rather than tone. This treats a plausible mechanism as a demonstrated one. Plausible is where you start looking, not where you stop.
lucas_SP_BR said:Keep the original post as written when you update it, and add the correction underneath.
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.
lucas_SP_BR said:Keep the original post as written when you update it, and add the correction underneath.
This is exactly what I could not find anywhere else.
PeptideDetective — Independent Peptide Analytics
Community-driven peptide testing and vendor rating platform. Transparent results. Unbiased analysis. Trusted by thousands.
View ResultsClinical perspective, offered as context rather than as advice. The mechanism and the magnitude are separate questions. Agreeing that something happens says nothing about whether it happens enough to act on.
That is the short version; the long version is somebody else's post.
Reporting back.
Follow-up — I put something in the gap where food used to be rather than waiting for the gap to close on its own. That was the part nobody told me.