log is the most under-discussed thing on this board
log is the most under-discussed thing on this board. Not a hot take, just something I have not seen said plainly here.
Contemporaneous records do not drift; reconstructed ones do, and the drift is systematic rather than random because memory smooths.
Wrote the concentration into the log as well as on the vial. Have referred back to it more than once.
The attribution problem, which is the reason most logs on this board cannot answer the question their owner is asking.
If dose, training, intake and sleep all changed in the same fortnight, no analysis of the resulting numbers can tell you which one moved the outcome. That is not a limitation of your spreadsheet; it is a limitation of the design.
The fix is unglamorous: change one thing at a time, leave it long enough to see, and annotate the weeks where something else intruded anyway — because life will intrude. A log with honest annotations answers questions. A log with four simultaneous changes and a confident conclusion is the most common thing posted here, and it does not.
Research-use-only material is not approved for human use and nothing here should be read as a recommendation to use it.
best — the order this archive was captured in
Missing entries recorded as blanks preserve the shape of the series. Dropping them silently makes the remaining points look more regular than they were.
Are the missed weeks in there as blanks or dropped entirely?
Are the missed weeks in there as blanks or dropped entirely?
Agreed — and the payoff genuinely arrives in month six, not week two.
Retitled — a log is a record, not a protocol, and the original read as a schedule for others to follow.
Retitled — a log is a record, not a protocol, and the original read as a schedule for others to follow.
Disagreeing with this bit: daily weighing gives you noise and costs you something.
I would not draw a trend line through that. Two points and a gap is not a series.