Adding the clinical framing, because it changes how the question reads. There is a difference between no evidence and evidence of no effect, and this subject is one where the two get swapped freely in both directions.
One concrete data point for the thread. 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.
A narrower follow-up, since the general answer is now clear:
What would you measure differently if you were starting again?
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 BiochemBethLabQueen said:If you are going to change something, change one thing and give it long enough to express itself.
This is where I part company with the consensus forming above. The counter-case has not been addressed. Somebody upthread described the situation that does not fit, and the thread moved on rather than engaging with it, which is the failure mode this board is supposed to avoid.
Happy to go further on any of that.
Moderator note: leaving this open. It is being argued well and the disagreement is the useful part. Thread quality here is what the rules are for. Keep it up.