The figures, for anyone assembling their own picture. 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.

If somebody has the primary source to hand I would rather cite it than paraphrase it.

Following on from PharmD_Rodriguez — and this may be the naive question:

How long did you give it before you decided it was working?

kate.chem said:

Practical: whatever you change, write down the date and the reason.

Pushing back on kate.chem here. Pushing back on the anecdote-stacking. Twenty people reporting the same thing is twenty samples from the same self-selected pool, not twenty independent confirmations.

kate.chem said:

Practical: whatever you change, write down the date and the reason.

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.

Worth separating that from the trial evidence, which this thread keeps folding into the same question. They behave differently and the advice does not transfer.

kate.chem said:

Practical: whatever you change, write down the date and the reason.

Saving this. It is the first explanation that did not require me to already understand it.