Adding the numbers, since they settle part of this. 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.
That is the short version; the long version is somebody else's post.
A narrower follow-up, since the general answer is now clear:
What would you measure differently if you were starting again?
DataDave said:If you are going to change something, change one thing and give it long enough to express itself.
I read this differently. The confidence in this thread is running ahead of the evidence, and I would rather the uncertainty were stated than smoothed over because it is unsatisfying.
Sigma-Aldrich — Research-Grade Standards
Certified reference materials, analytical reagents, and research-grade standards for peptide verification. Trusted by laboratories worldwide.
Shop Reference StandardsDataDave said:If you are going to change something, change one thing and give it long enough to express itself.
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.
I would rather be corrected than agreed with, if it comes to it.
DataDave said:If you are going to change something, change one thing and give it long enough to express itself.
Thank you for spelling out the reasoning rather than just the conclusion. I will report back once I have actually tried it.