Reconstitution arithmetic is only half the problem. The other half is what was in the vial.
Narrow conclusion, briefly right. Broad conclusion, interestingly wrong. I know which I keep choosing.
An inconclusive account is useful if it stops the next person mistaking a story for a controlled comparison.
What is the first thing you would read if you were starting from zero?
Test one thing at a time. It feels slower and it is the only way to learn anything.
Same here.
Most of what is called evidence here is one person, one vial, one month.
Same here.
How long before you can reasonably say something is or is not doing anything?
Log dose, time and sleep. Ten seconds a day and it turns the anecdote into something you can look at.
Where does the human data stop and the extrapolation begin? That is the whole thread.
Test one thing at a time. It feels slower and it is the only way to learn anything.