Narrow conclusion, briefly right. Broad conclusion, interestingly wrong. I know which I keep choosing.
Narrow conclusion. A fortnight in on TB-500 and it lines up.
What is the first thing you would read if you were starting from zero?
What is the first thing you would read if you were starting from zero?
An inconclusive account is useful if it stops the next person mistaking a story for a controlled comparison.
Loose evidence is not nothing, but a washout either side is the only reason to trust your own take.
Same here.
Underdosing and tolerance are indistinguishable from the inside, and everyone picks the flattering explanation.
Stupid question: how do you know whether what is in the vial matches the label at all?
Loose evidence and no evidence are different, and people overcorrect in both directions.
Where does the human data stop and the extrapolation begin? That is the whole thread. Same for me with TB-500, unfortunately.
Read the methods section. It is the only part that says whether the conclusion is allowed to exist. Same for me with TB-500, unfortunately.
How long before you can reasonably say something is or is not doing anything?
Same here.
A certificate of analysis answers one question and gets quoted as though it answers four.