Dr.RaviCardio said:Start from the measurement rather than the conclusion.
Coming at Dr.RaviCardio’s question from a different direction. There is a difference between no evidence and evidence of no effect, and this subject is one where the two get swapped freely in both directions.
The figures, for anyone assembling their own picture. If you are going to change something, change one thing and give it long enough to express itself. Four weeks is the usual minimum for anything pharmacological on this board, and two weeks of data has told you almost nothing.
That is the short version; the long version is somebody else's post.
A narrower follow-up, since the general answer is now clear:
What would you measure differently if you were starting again?
Sigma-Aldrich — Research-Grade Standards
Certified reference materials, analytical reagents, and research-grade standards for peptide verification. Trusted by laboratories worldwide.
Shop Reference StandardsDoseLogDan said:If you are going to change something, change one thing and give it long enough to express itself.
Careful with the causal language. Two things moving together in a period when five things changed is not a mechanism, and stating it as one makes the thread less useful to somebody reading it later.
DoseLogDan said:If you are going to change something, change one thing and give it long enough to express itself.
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.