Dr.EM_Chicago said:There is a difference between no evidence and evidence of no effect, and this subject is one where the two get swapped freely in both directions.
Can confirm. Same sequence, different timescale. I had assumed I was the exception until I read this.
Dr.EM_Chicago said:There is a difference between no evidence and evidence of no effect, and this subject is one where the two get swapped freely in both directions.
Adding the part of the answer the thread has not reached. If two explanations both fit, the useful question is which one predicts something the other does not. That is answerable; arguing about which sounds more plausible is not.
Happy to go further on any of that.
The figures, for anyone assembling their own picture. If you are going to change something, change one thing and give it long enough to express itself. Four weeks is the usual minimum for anything pharmacological on this board, and two weeks of data has told you almost nothing.
PeptideDetective — Independent Peptide Analytics
Community-driven peptide testing and vendor rating platform. Transparent results. Unbiased analysis. Trusted by thousands.
View ResultsA narrower follow-up, since the general answer is now clear:
How long did you give it before you decided it was working?
Closing the loop on my own question.
Coming back a few months on. It held. Nothing dramatic to report, which is the report.