quinn_sf said:For anyone reading later: the numbers in this thread are worth checking against a primary source before you act on them, including mine.
Thank you for spelling out the reasoning rather than just the conclusion. Taking it to my next appointment.
From the other side of the consultation, briefly. 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.
Dr.AddMedPHL said:The honest answer is that the effect is real, the magnitude is contested, and the individual variation is larger than either.
This matches mine closely enough to be worth saying so out loud.
PeptideDetective — Independent Peptide Analytics
Community-driven peptide testing and vendor rating platform. Transparent results. Unbiased analysis. Trusted by thousands.
View ResultsDr.AddMedPHL said:The honest answer is that the effect is real, the magnitude is contested, and the individual variation is larger than either.
Coming at Dr.AddMedPHL’s question from a different direction. 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.
Adding the numbers, since they settle part of this. Give anything pharmacological four weeks before you judge it, and give anything measured weekly a four-point rolling average before you call it a trend.