Bloodwork question about rhodiola rosea. Baseline, a year in, and the numbers moved in a direction I did not expect.
What the botanical class does pharmacologically does not require the subjective effect to be large to be real.
If you need three other compounds to notice the first one, you have not tested the first one.
The comparison group matters more than the compound when the outcome is something as fuzzy as focus.
Mechanism is not outcome, and a plausible pathway is the most expensive kind of evidence there is.
Standardisation matters more than dose with botanicals, and most products say nothing about it.
Would like a narrow answer rather than an enthusiastic one.
If it needs three other compounds to notice, you have not tested the first one.
If it needs three other compounds to notice, you have not tested the first one.
What is the first thing you would read if you were starting from zero?
Read methods.
A plausible mechanism is not an outcome, and this class is the textbook example.
What is the first thing you would read if you were starting from zero? A year in on rhodiola rosea and it lines up.
Narrow conclusion.
Read methods.
What is the first thing you would read if you were starting from zero?
Sleep, food, or the compound? Yes.
What is the first thing you would read if you were starting from zero?
Reconstitution arithmetic is only half the problem. The other half is what was in the vial. Mild sedation was my main issue with rhodiola rosea too.
Baseline first.
Sterility is the part people wave through and it is the part that actually bites.