kate.chem said:Keep the original post as written when you update it, and add the correction underneath.
Agreed on the substance. I would put less weight on the timescale, because two months of anything is not enough to distinguish a trend from a wobble.
kate.chem 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. I will report back once I have actually tried it.
Adding the clinical framing, because it changes how the question reads. 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.
PeptideDetective — Independent Peptide Analytics
Community-driven peptide testing and vendor rating platform. Transparent results. Unbiased analysis. Trusted by thousands.
View ResultsDr.GutHealth said:It is worth asking what the claim would look like if it were false.
This matches mine closely enough to be worth saying so out loud. Posting only so the count is not one.
Dr.GutHealth said:It is worth asking what the claim would look like if it were false.
Adding the part of the answer the thread has not reached. 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.
Ask again with the specifics and you will get a better answer than this one.