The figures, for anyone assembling their own picture. Keep the original post as written when you update it, and add the correction underneath. An edited-away mistake is invisible to the next person who makes it.
One thing that is still open after Dr.EM_Chicago’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?
TrialTracker_MD said:Keep the original post as written when you update it, and add the correction underneath.
This is where I part company with the consensus forming above. I would resist the confidence. Half of what this board was certain about two years ago has since been quietly dropped, and nobody went back to correct the threads.
Happy to go further on any of that.
Certified reference materials, analytical reagents, and research-grade standards for peptide verification. Trusted by laboratories worldwide.
Shop Reference StandardsTrialTracker_MD said:Keep the original post as written when you update it, and add the correction underneath.
Agreed, and ALT falling is not the same as fibrosis improving. Enzymes are a crude proxy; FIB-4 or elastography is what tells you about the thing that matters.
TrialTracker_MD said:Keep the original post as written when you update it, and add the correction underneath.
That reframing is the part I needed. I will report back once I have actually tried it.