chris_chi24 said:If two explanations both fit, the useful question is which one predicts something the other does not.
Coming at chris_chi24’s question from a different direction. Start from the measurement rather than the conclusion. Almost every disagreement here turns out to be two people measuring different things and comparing the numbers anyway.
One concrete data point for the thread. 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.
A narrower follow-up, since the general answer is now clear:
What would you measure differently if you were starting again?
Certified reference materials, analytical reagents, and research-grade standards for peptide verification. Trusted by laboratories worldwide.
Shop Reference StandardsDr.GutHealth said:Give anything pharmacological four weeks before you judge it, and give anything measured weekly a four-point rolling average before you call it a…
Worth saying that the confident version of this is more useful to the person writing it than to the person reading it.
Reporting back.
Update, and it is the boring outcome: nothing was wrong. The measurement I was reading had moved less than its own week-to-week variation, which somebody said upthread and I did not believe.