DataDave 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…
Thank you — that is the clearest version of this I have read, and I have read a lot of them. I will report back once I have actually tried it.
Clinical perspective, offered as context rather than as advice. Take it one variable at a time. Almost every unanswerable question in these threads is unanswerable because three things changed in the same fortnight, and no amount of subsequent argument can untangle them after the fact.
DeniseRN_TPA said:Almost every unanswerable question in these threads is unanswerable because three things changed in the same fortnight, and no amount of subsequent…
Adding a me-too, because a thread of one person's experience is not much use.
Sigma-Aldrich — Research-Grade Standards
Certified reference materials, analytical reagents, and research-grade standards for peptide verification. Trusted by laboratories worldwide.
Shop Reference StandardsDeniseRN_TPA said:Almost every unanswerable question in these threads is unanswerable because three things changed in the same fortnight, and no amount of subsequent…
Adding the part of the answer the thread has not reached. 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.
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.
Ask again with the specifics and you will get a better answer than this one.