Trying to separate three different claims about memantine: that it is the right molecule, that it is the right dose, and that it does something useful.
Most of the popular protocols are borrowed from clinical populations and applied to healthy people without comment.
Two weeks is not enough time to attribute anything to a compound unless the effect is dramatic.
The animal data is stronger than the human data and the human data is not nothing, it is just small.
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.
Read the methods section. It is the only part that says whether the conclusion is allowed to exist. How long have you been on memantine?
Is a baseline blood test really necessary before starting something like this? How long have you been on memantine?
Most of the popular protocol is borrowed from a clinical population and applied to healthy people without comment.
Three questions kill most of the confidence in a thread like this: sample size, blinding, who paid.
Test one thing at a time. It feels slower and it is the only way to learn anything. Currently on memantine myself.
Log dose, time and sleep. Ten seconds a day and it turns the anecdote into something you can look at.
Underdosing and tolerance are indistinguishable from the inside, and everyone picks the flattering explanation.
Sleep, food, or the compound? Yes. How long have you been on memantine?
What is the first thing you would read if you were starting from zero?
A certificate of analysis answers one question and gets quoted as though it answers four.
A certificate of analysis answers one question and gets quoted as though it answers four. Currently on memantine myself.
A certificate of analysis answers one question and gets quoted as though it answers four. Side effects was my main issue with memantine too.
An inconclusive account is useful if it stops the next person mistaking a story for a controlled comparison.