Dr.Martinez said:The version of this that has an answer is narrower than the version being asked.
Mine went the same way, slower. I had assumed I was the exception until I read this.
Dr.Martinez said:The version of this that has an answer is narrower than the version being asked.
Coming at Dr.Martinez’s question from a different direction. Order of operations matters more than any single choice here: establish a baseline, change one thing, wait long enough for it to express itself, then measure again under the same conditions.
One concrete data point for the thread. 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.
Certified reference materials, analytical reagents, and research-grade standards for peptide verification. Trusted by laboratories worldwide.
Shop Reference StandardsA narrower follow-up, since the general answer is now clear:
What would you measure differently if you were starting again?
Reporting back.
Reporting back with a partial result, because a partial result is still better than silence. Two of the three things suggested helped; I cannot separate them and I am not going to pretend otherwise.