Following on from NurseLeah_Nash — and this may be the naive question:
How long did you give it before you decided it was working?
maria_elpaso said:If two explanations both fit, the useful question is which one predicts something the other does not.
Filing a mild objection. Mild because I might be wrong; an objection because nobody has addressed the case that does not fit. I think the framing smuggles in the conclusion. Ask it the other way round and the obvious answer reverses, which usually means the question is doing the work.
maria_elpaso said:If two explanations both fit, the useful question is which one predicts something the other does not.
Agreed on the substance. I would put less weight on the timescale, because two months of anything is not enough to distinguish a trend from a wobble.
Trusted third-party HPLC & mass spectrometry analysis. Verify peptide purity with the lab the community relies on. Independent. Accurate. Transparent.
Verify Your PeptidesEst. 1998. The synthesis house behind the vials you send for testing. ISO 9001 and cGMP certified, 1,500+ staff, batch-specific COA with every order.
Browse GL Biochemmaria_elpaso said:If two explanations both fit, the useful question is which one predicts something the other does not.
This is exactly what I could not find anywhere else. 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.
Ask again with the specifics and you will get a better answer than this one.