jim_asheville said:Following this thread I went back and re-read the extension data properly.
I will push back on the "any working dose is fine" framing. The maintenance evidence sits overwhelmingly at the top studied dose, and the extension data shows regain tracking dose reduction rather than tracking stopping. Holding low is reasonable; pretending it is evidentially equivalent is not.
jim_asheville said:Following this thread I went back and re-read the extension data properly.
That holds for the injectable. The oral formulation has different absorption behaviour and the dose numbers are not interchangeable, which is worth saying out loud because people quote them as if they were.
Happy to go further on any of that.
jim_asheville said:Following this thread I went back and re-read the extension data properly.
That reframing is the part I needed. Printing the relevant bit and taking it with me.
PeptideDetective — Independent Peptide Analytics
Community-driven peptide testing and vendor rating platform. Transparent results. Unbiased analysis. Trusted by thousands.
View ResultsFrom the other side of the consultation, briefly. The version of this that has an answer is narrower than the version being asked. Narrow it and it becomes tractable; leave it broad and the thread will produce nine confident and incompatible replies.
GenomicsKate said:The version of this that has an answer is narrower than the version being asked.
Same experience, arrived at from the opposite direction.