roxy_nash said:Glycemic variability as the key metric for glycaemic control success: my coefficient of variation (CV) on CGM dropped from 41% to 20%.
That holds where the measurement is reliable. Where it is noisy — and a lot of what gets tracked here is noisy — the same reasoning produces confident nonsense.
TrialTracker_MD said:Insulin sensitivity test (HOMA-IR) on glycaemic control — arguably the most important metabolic marker most people aren't tracking: HOMA-IR = (fasting…
Bookmarking. The distinction being drawn above is the one nobody else makes. Printing the relevant bit and taking it with me.
roxy_nash said:Glycemic variability as the key metric for glycaemic control success: my coefficient of variation (CV) on CGM dropped from 41% to 20%.
I read this differently from roxy_nash, on substance rather than tone. The counter-case has not been addressed. Somebody upthread described the situation that does not fit, and the thread moved on rather than engaging with it, which is the failure mode this board is supposed to avoid.
Certified reference materials, analytical reagents, and research-grade standards for peptide verification. Trusted by laboratories worldwide.
Shop Reference StandardsAdding the numbers, since they settle part of this. Practical: whatever you change, write down the date and the reason. In three months the reason is what you will have forgotten, and the reason is what makes the record worth having.
Moderator note: a post naming a supplier has been edited. Discuss suppliers in the review sections, not here. Thread quality here is what the rules are for. Keep it up.