VendorMark said:The honest answer is that the effect is real, the magnitude is contested, and the individual variation is larger than either.
This matches mine closely enough to be worth saying so out loud.
One thing that is still open after Dr.SleepRoch’s answer:
What the dose-response curve actually looks like above 1.7mg, because the trial means hide how few people account for the extra loss?
lisa_labSD said:If you are going to change something, change one thing and give it long enough to express itself.
I read this differently from lisa_labSD, on substance rather than tone. The trial means are being read too generously in this thread. STEP populations were selected, supported, and titrated by protocol, and the real-world curves are consistently a few points worse. That difference is not noise, it is what happens when you remove the study infrastructure.
Certified reference materials, analytical reagents, and research-grade standards for peptide verification. Trusted by laboratories worldwide.
Shop Reference Standardslisa_labSD said:If you are going to change something, change one thing and give it long enough to express itself.
That is right, and it stops being right at the edges. The general case is well behaved; the interesting cases in this thread are all at the boundary where the general case breaks.
Moderator note: a post naming a supplier has been edited. Discuss suppliers in the review sections, not here. Thread quality here is what the rules are for. Keep it up.