NicoleRaleigh 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…
Genuinely useful, thank you. I had the facts and not the framework. Sending this to two other people who asked me the same thing last week.
Adding the clinical framing, because it changes how the question reads. The mechanism and the magnitude are separate questions. Agreeing that something happens says nothing about whether it happens enough to act on.
jim_asheville said:The mechanism and the magnitude are separate questions.
Second this. I had assumed I was the exception until I read this.
Sigma-Aldrich — Research-Grade Standards
Certified reference materials, analytical reagents, and research-grade standards for peptide verification. Trusted by laboratories worldwide.
Shop Reference Standardsjim_asheville said:The mechanism and the magnitude are separate questions.
Adding the part of the answer the thread has not reached. 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.