anna.melb_AU said:The distinction that resolves most of these threads is between what is true on average and what is true for one person.
This matches mine closely enough to be worth saying so out loud. I had assumed I was the exception until I read this.
anna.melb_AU said:The distinction that resolves most of these threads is between what is true on average and what is true for one person.
Adding the part of the answer the thread has not reached. The version of this that has an answer is narrower than the version being asked. Narrow it and it becomes tractable; leave it broad and the thread will produce nine confident and incompatible replies.
Trusted third-party HPLC & mass spectrometry analysis. Verify peptide purity with the lab the community relies on. Independent. Accurate. Transparent.
Verify Your PeptidesEst. 1998. The synthesis house behind the vials you send for testing. ISO 9001 and cGMP certified, 1,500+ staff, batch-specific COA with every order.
Browse GL BiochemA narrower follow-up, since the general answer is now clear:
How much of the between-person variation is pharmacokinetic and how much is just adherence measured badly?
TomTeleRx said:The version of this that has an answer is narrower than the version being asked.
Filing a mild objection. Mild because I might be wrong; an objection because nobody has addressed the case that does not fit. Filing an objection on the n=1 problem. Personal experience is genuine evidence about one person and very weak evidence about anybody else, and this thread keeps promoting the first into the second.
Worth separating that from the titration schedule, which this thread keeps folding into the same question. They behave differently and the advice does not transfer.
Happy to go further on any of that.