Dr.DermMIA said:It is worth asking what the claim would look like if it were false.
There is a second half to this that has not been said yet. The honest answer is that the effect is real, the magnitude is contested, and the individual variation is larger than either. Those three things can all be true at once, and most arguments here are two people holding different parts of that.
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.
A narrower follow-up, since the general answer is now clear:
Did your prescriber agree with that reading, and if not what was their objection?
Sigma-Aldrich — Research-Grade Standards
Certified reference materials, analytical reagents, and research-grade standards for peptide verification. Trusted by laboratories worldwide.
Shop Reference StandardsDr.GutHealth said:If you are going to change something, change one thing and give it long enough to express itself.
Pushing back on Dr.GutHealth here. I would resist the confidence. Half of what this board was certain about two years ago has since been quietly dropped, and nobody went back to correct the threads.
If somebody has the primary source to hand I would rather cite it than paraphrase it.
Dr.GutHealth said:If you are going to change something, change one thing and give it long enough to express itself.
That is right for the common case. Whether it is right for the case being asked about depends on a detail that has not been given.