PharmacoVig_BOS said:Keep the original post as written when you update it, and add the correction underneath.
I am going to disagree with the direction of travel here. The thread has converged on the tidiest answer rather than the best-supported one, and those are not the same thing.
PharmacoVig_BOS said:Keep the original post as written when you update it, and add the correction underneath.
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.
I would rather be corrected than agreed with, if it comes to it.
PharmacoVig_BOS said:Keep the original post as written when you update it, and add the correction underneath.
Saving this. It is the first explanation that did not require me to already understand it. I will report back once I have actually tried it.
Community-driven peptide testing and vendor rating platform. Transparent results. Unbiased analysis. Trusted by thousands.
View ResultsClinical perspective, offered as context rather than as advice. If two explanations both fit, the useful question is which one predicts something the other does not. That is answerable; arguing about which sounds more plausible is not.
Correct me if the detail matters more than I have assumed.
Reporting back.
Update — tachyphylaxis to the gastric effect, persistence of the appetite effect. Two curves, and I had been watching the wrong one.