PharmHunterJen said:Worth answering the question that was asked rather than the one behind it.
Same pattern here, and in the same order. Nothing to add that would improve it.
PharmHunterJen said:Worth answering the question that was asked rather than the one behind it.
There is a second half to this that has not been said yet. It is worth asking what the claim would look like if it were false. If nothing would look different, it is not a claim about the world and no amount of discussion will settle it.
One concrete data point for the thread. One habit that pays for itself: post the method alongside the number. A figure without its method cannot be checked, and an unchecked figure is how this community accumulates folklore.
Community-driven peptide testing and vendor rating platform. Transparent results. Unbiased analysis. Trusted by thousands.
View ResultsA 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?
OP back with an update, since a thread like this is useless without one.
Six weeks on from posting: I stopped reading the weekly number and started reading a four-week average, and the "stall" I opened this thread about was a 1.8kg loss I could not see.