I have been running bromocriptine for six weeks and the honest summary is that the effect is smaller than the internet suggests and real.
Loose evidence is not the same as no evidence and people overcorrect in both directions.
I would rather have a narrow conclusion and be right than a broad one and be interesting.
What surprised me is how much of the perceived benefit was routine and attention rather than pharmacology.
Where does the human data stop and the extrapolation start?
Three questions kill most of the confidence in a thread like this: sample size, blinding, who paid. Currently on bromocriptine myself.
How long before you can reasonably say something is or is not doing anything?
What is the first thing you would read if you were starting from zero?
Log dose, time and sleep. Ten seconds a day and it turns the anecdote into something you can look at.
This board overrates bloodwork. A number moving is not the outcome you wanted.
Read the methods section. It is the only part that says whether the conclusion is allowed to exist.