sophie_paris said:

Most of what circulates confidently in this community traces back to one summary of one study, and the qualifier was dropped somewhere in the third…

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.

Ask again with the specifics and you will get a better answer than this one.

MikeNYC_runner said:

Right, and one flattering data point from a group buy is not consistency.

Saving this. It is the first explanation that did not require me to already understand it. Adding it to my notes with a link back to this thread.

sophie_paris said:

Most of what circulates confidently in this community traces back to one summary of one study, and the qualifier was dropped somewhere in the third…

Careful with the causal language. Two things moving together in a period when five things changed is not a mechanism, and stating it as one makes the thread less useful to somebody reading it later.

That is the short version; the long version is somebody else's post.

The figures, for anyone assembling their own picture. The boring version of this is the one that works, and the boring version is: measure a baseline, change one variable, wait, measure again under the same conditions. Nobody wants that answer and it is still the answer.

Moderator note: reminder that nothing in this thread is medical advice, and that clinical claims need a source. Tagging this one for the weekly digest.