tried interval stretching for 3 weeks. here is what happened.
Long-ish post, sorry. tl;dr at the bottom.
I have been tracking appetite return against eGFR for 23 weeks because I could not find anyone who had. The correlation is weaker than I expected, which is itself mildly interesting given how confidently people link the two in here.
Caveats up front: one person, one lab, one assay, no control, and I changed my training in the middle of it, which was stupid.
tl;dr: probably real, definitely smaller than the threads imply, and not worth reorganising your week around.
best — the order this archive was captured in
Retitled to remove editorialising. Put the evidence in the body.
interval stretching versus dose reduction
Inter-lab variance on this kind of assay is routinely 1–2 points. Different column, different gradient, different integration.
Inter-lab variance on this kind of assay is routinely 1–2 points.
Disagree on that part. 93.7% and 99.3% on the same vial is normal.
What are you comparing it against though?
regain on taper is expected, plan for it
Which country? Half the answers in this thread only apply in Canada.
The injection-site soreness was genuinely awful for three weeks and then simply stopped. I know that is not useful information, but it is what happened.
the people who came off and restarted without shame
How many weeks between the two measurements?
Yeah, regain is not a failure.
This is the "correlation is mechanism" thing again. You changed three variables at once.
interval stretching versus dose reduction
Mechanistically the bit that matters is discontinuation. It explains most of the early profile and a decent chunk of the outcome.
tapering instructions are not welcome here
Poland here. Waited 18 months on a list, gave up, went private, and the total cost was roughly what I expected.
regain on taper is expected, plan for it
Rodent data is rodent data. Dose scaling is not linear and the models tell you what to investigate, not what to expect.
Small correction: the trial was 12 weeks, not 8. Does not change your point but people will quote it.
the people who came off and restarted without shame
Not convinced. The evidence does not support that reading.
Sceptical. If this were true we would see it reflected in the data and we do not.
tapering instructions are not welcome here
tapering instructions are not welcome here
Disagree on that part. 97.4% and 96.8% on the same vial is normal.
Yeah, regain is not a failure.
- 1Retitled to remove editorialising. Put the evidence in the body.5 comments in this branch · started by u/skip_week_sceptic
- 2The injection-site soreness was genuinely awful for three weeks and then…5 comments in this branch · started by u/hana_lehtinen