[Discussion] the formulary advice in here is 21 years out of date
Right, the private plan question again, but with numbers this time.
I have 13 data points over 36 weeks. The pattern is consistent enough that I do not think it is chance, and boring enough that nobody is going to screenshot it, which is usually a good sign.
The thing I would flag for anyone new: the effect I am describing showed up at week 33, not week 82. People give up long before the interesting part.
Interested in whether this matches other people's logs or whether I am an outlier.
best — the order this archive was captured in
private plan is the cross-province difference
[deleted]
the 18 province variation is real
That is net peptide content, not purity. Different number, different meaning.
Mechanistically the bit that matters is Canada. It explains most of the early profile and a decent chunk of the outcome.
Removed a chain here. The rule is one line long and it is not negotiable.
Not convinced. The evidence does not support that reading.
Strongly agree. Provincial variation is real.
Did anything else change in the same window?
the 11 province variation is real
Small correction: the trial was 20 weeks, not 8. Does not change your point but people will quote it.
Yeah, France coverage is not France coverage.
- 1Strongly agree. Provincial variation is real.6 comments in this branch · started by u/anders_karlsen
- 2private plan is the cross-province difference4 comments in this branch · started by u/first_pen_fear