Meta-level question: how do you evaluate evidence for exemestane when the human data is thin and most trials are small?
Most of the popular protocols are borrowed from clinical populations and applied to healthy people without comment.
I have started logging dose, time, and sleep because otherwise the anecdote is just a mood.
Baseline first. Without a baseline the after picture is decoration.
What is the strongest human evidence anyone here has actually read, not skimmed?
Cold storage, light protection, date on the vial. Boring, removes half the variables.
Log dose, time and sleep. Ten seconds a day and it turns the anecdote into something you can look at. Currently on exemestane myself.
Log dose, time and sleep. Ten seconds a day and it turns the anecdote into something you can look at.
I would take the narrow conclusion. Broad ones are more interesting and less true.
Same here.
Sleep, food, or the compound? Yes. Not on exemestane but the pattern is familiar.
How long before you can reasonably say something is or is not doing anything? Not on exemestane but the pattern is familiar.
Same here.
Where does the human data stop and the extrapolation begin? That is the whole thread.