Old thread, but it comes up first when you search for this, so it is worth updating. If you are going to change something, change one thing and give it long enough to express itself. Four weeks is the usual minimum for anything pharmacological on this board, and two weeks of data has told you almost nothing.

FDA_TrackerJim said:

One practical note: write down what you did and when, before you need it.

Correct, and worth adding that it is reversible. Nothing being described here is a one-way door, which changes how cautious it is reasonable to be.

FDA_TrackerJim said:

One practical note: write down what you did and when, before you need it.

That reframing is the part I needed. Printing the relevant bit and taking it with me.

Adding the clinical framing, because it changes how the question reads. Worth answering the question that was asked rather than the one behind it. The narrow version usually has an answer; the broad version usually does not, and answering the broad one is how a thread stops being useful.

EndoResFellow said:

Worth answering the question that was asked rather than the one behind it.

Adding a me-too, because a thread of one person's experience is not much use.