Adding the clinical framing, because it changes how the question reads. The distinction that resolves most of these threads is between what is true on average and what is true for one person. Both are real; they answer different questions and get quoted as if they were the same one.
LabKate said:sarah_TO said: ...regarding the discontinuation data for cost and coverage...
Adding the part of the answer the thread has not reached. The version of this that has an answer is narrower than the version being asked. Narrow it and it becomes tractable; leave it broad and the thread will produce nine confident and incompatible replies.
The figures, for anyone assembling their own picture. Give anything pharmacological four weeks before you judge it, and give anything measured weekly a four-point rolling average before you call it a trend.
Community-driven peptide testing and vendor rating platform. Transparent results. Unbiased analysis. Trusted by thousands.
View ResultsFollowing on from LabKate — and this may be the naive question:
How would you tell the difference between that and the alternative explanation?
Moderator note: two posts asking for a source have been merged into one. Please search the thread before asking again. Thread quality here is what the rules are for. Keep it up.