james_edin said:baseline bloodwork + this community = winning.
True, with the qualification that this is a self-selected group. The people for whom it did not work post less, and that shapes everything we think we know.
stefan_berlin said:Agreed, and reference ranges are laboratory-specific.
Saving this. It is the first explanation that did not require me to already understand it.
james_edin said:baseline bloodwork + this community = winning.
Filing a mild objection. Mild because I might be wrong; an objection because nobody has addressed the case that does not fit. Filing an objection on the n=1 problem. Personal experience is genuine evidence about one person and very weak evidence about anybody else, and this thread keeps promoting the first into the second.
Certified reference materials, analytical reagents, and research-grade standards for peptide verification. Trusted by laboratories worldwide.
Shop Reference StandardsThe figures, for anyone assembling their own picture. One practical note: write down what you did and when, before you need it. Reconstructing a timeline from memory three months later is how people end up unable to answer the one question that would have resolved it.