Long post, sorry. AOD-9604: what actually has human evidence behind it, and what is extrapolation from animals?
I would rather have a narrow conclusion and be right than a broad one and be interesting.
Mechanism is not outcome, and a plausible pathway is the most expensive kind of evidence there is.
Sample size, blinding, and who paid for it. Those three questions kill most of the confidence in most of these threads.
Animal data is much of what exists here and the human stuff is thin and small.
The interesting question is not whether it works but for whom and at what cost.
Log dose, time and sleep. Ten seconds a day and it turns the anecdote into something you can look at.
Baseline first.
I would take the narrow conclusion. Broad ones are more interesting and less true.
Reconstitution arithmetic is only half the problem. The other half is what was in the vial. Water retention was my main issue with AOD-9604 too.
Is a baseline blood test really necessary before starting something like this?
Stupid question: how do you know whether what is in the vial matches the label at all?
An inconclusive account is useful if it stops the next person mistaking a story for a controlled comparison. Currently on AOD-9604 myself.
Same here.
Most of the popular protocol is borrowed from a clinical population and applied to healthy people without comment.
Sleep, food, or the compound? Yes.
Stupid question: how do you know whether what is in the vial matches the label at all? Same for me with AOD-9604, unfortunately.
Read methods. Same for me with AOD-9604, unfortunately.
Stupid question: how do you know whether what is in the vial matches the label at all? How long have you been on AOD-9604?
Nobody has ever been talked out of a stack by a stranger on the internet.