From the other side of the consultation, briefly. The honest answer is that the effect is real, the magnitude is contested, and the individual variation is larger than either. Those three things can all be true at once, and most arguments here are two people holding different parts of that.
Ask again with the specifics and you will get a better answer than this one.
JenPlateau said:The honest answer is that the effect is real, the magnitude is contested, and the individual variation is larger than either.
Second this. I had assumed I was the exception until I read this.
JenPlateau said:The honest answer is that the effect is real, the magnitude is contested, and the individual variation is larger than either.
Adding the part of the answer the thread has not reached. Worth answering the question that was asked rather than the one behind it. The narrow version usually has an answer; the broad version usually does not, and answering the broad one is how a thread stops being useful.
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 BiochemAdding the numbers, since they settle part of this. 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.
I would rather be corrected than agreed with, if it comes to it.
A narrower follow-up, since the general answer is now clear:
How would you tell the difference between that and the alternative explanation?