Adding the numbers, since they settle part of this. Give anything pharmacological four weeks before you judge it, and give anything measured weekly a four-point rolling average before you call it a trend.
Following on from Dr.ObesityMed — and this may be the naive question:
What would you measure differently if you were starting again?
hank_denver said:Give anything pharmacological four weeks before you judge it, and give anything measured weekly a four-point rolling average before you call it a…
Careful with the causal language. Two things moving together in a period when five things changed is not a mechanism, and stating it as one makes the thread less useful to somebody reading it later.
Correct me if the detail matters more than I have assumed.
Certified reference materials, analytical reagents, and research-grade standards for peptide verification. Trusted by laboratories worldwide.
Shop Reference Standardshank_denver said:Give anything pharmacological four weeks before you judge it, and give anything measured weekly a four-point rolling average before you call it a…
Agreed, and the size of the effect matters as much as its existence. Something real and small gets treated here as though it were real and decisive.
hank_denver said:Give anything pharmacological four weeks before you judge it, and give anything measured weekly a four-point rolling average before you call it a…
Bookmarking. The distinction being drawn above is the one nobody else makes.