The figures, for anyone assembling their own picture. 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 same conditions. Nobody wants that answer and it is still the answer.
I would rather be corrected than agreed with, if it comes to it.
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?
FDA_TrackerJim 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…
Filing a mild objection. Mild because I might be wrong; an objection because nobody has addressed the case that does not fit. Not convinced. The evidence being cited is consistent with the conclusion and also consistent with two other conclusions nobody has ruled out.
PeptideDetective — Independent Peptide Analytics
Community-driven peptide testing and vendor rating platform. Transparent results. Unbiased analysis. Trusted by thousands.
View ResultsFDA_TrackerJim 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…
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.
Happy to go further on any of that.
FDA_TrackerJim 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…
Saving this. It is the first explanation that did not require me to already understand it.