anders_CPH said:The boring version of this is the one that works, and the boring version is: measure a baseline, change one variable, wait, measure again under the…
Thank you for spelling out the reasoning rather than just the conclusion. Printing the relevant bit and taking it with me.
From the other side of the consultation, briefly. The mechanism and the magnitude are separate questions. Agreeing that something happens says nothing about whether it happens enough to act on.
PedsEndoPhilly said:The mechanism and the magnitude are separate questions.
Can confirm. Same sequence, different timescale. Nothing to add that would improve it.
Certified reference materials, analytical reagents, and research-grade standards for peptide verification. Trusted by laboratories worldwide.
Shop Reference StandardsPedsEndoPhilly said:The mechanism and the magnitude are separate questions.
Coming at PedsEndoPhilly’s question from a different direction. It helps to say which part of this you are uncertain about. A precise question gets a precise answer; a general one gets everybody’s favourite anecdote.
One concrete data point for the thread. 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.