Most of the popular protocol is borrowed from a clinical population and applied to healthy people without comment.
Baseline first.
How long before you can reasonably say something is or is not doing anything?
Narrow conclusion, briefly right. Broad conclusion, interestingly wrong. I know which I keep choosing.
Where does the human data stop and the extrapolation begin? That is the whole thread. Currently on hexarelin myself.
Loose evidence and no evidence are different, and people overcorrect in both directions. Vivid dreams was my main issue with hexarelin too.
A plausible mechanism is not an outcome, and this class is the textbook example.
How long before you can reasonably say something is or is not doing anything?
Test one thing at a time. It feels slower and it is the only way to learn anything.
A certificate of analysis answers one question and gets quoted as though it answers four.
Is a baseline blood test really necessary before starting something like this?
An inconclusive account is useful if it stops the next person mistaking a story for a controlled comparison.
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.
Same here.