BiostatsBrad said:Worth stating the units and the reference range whenever you post a number here.
Filing a mild objection. Mild because I might be wrong; an objection because nobody has addressed the case that does not fit. This treats a plausible mechanism as a demonstrated one. Plausible is where you start looking, not where you stop.
Ask again with the specifics and you will get a better answer than this one.
OP back with an update, since a thread like this is useless without one.
Reporting back after another eight months at the same dose. Still losing slowly, no new side effects, and no reason I can find to climb further.
BiostatsBrad said:Worth stating the units and the reference range whenever you post a number here.
Saving this. It is the first explanation that did not require me to already understand it. Printing the relevant bit and taking it with me.
Sigma-Aldrich — Research-Grade Standards
Certified reference materials, analytical reagents, and research-grade standards for peptide verification. Trusted by laboratories worldwide.
Shop Reference StandardsClinical perspective, offered as context rather than as advice. Start from the measurement rather than the conclusion. Almost every disagreement here turns out to be two people measuring different things and comparing the numbers anyway.
Old thread, but it comes up first when you search for this, so it is worth updating. The boring version of this is the one that works, and the boring version is: measure a baseline, change one variable, wait, measure again under the same conditions. Nobody wants that answer and it is still the answer.