Following on from Dr.KarenChen — and this may be the naive question:
What did you change at the same time, and can you separate the two now?
Dr.DermMIA said:The answer turned out to depend on the detail I had left out of the opening post, which is a lesson about how to ask rather than about the subject.
This is where I part company with the consensus forming above. Filing an objection on the n=1 problem. Personal experience is genuine evidence about one person and very weak evidence about anybody else, and this thread keeps promoting the first into the second.
Dr.DermMIA said:The answer turned out to depend on the detail I had left out of the opening post, which is a lesson about how to ask rather than about the subject.
True, with the qualification that this is a self-selected group. The people for whom it did not work post less, and that shapes everything we think we know.
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 BiochemDr.DermMIA said:The answer turned out to depend on the detail I had left out of the opening post, which is a lesson about how to ask rather than about the subject.
Thank you — that is the clearest version of this I have read, and I have read a lot of them. Printing the relevant bit and taking it with me.
From the other side of the consultation, briefly. It is worth asking what the claim would look like if it were false. If nothing would look different, it is not a claim about the world and no amount of discussion will settle it.