The lead-in, the randomisation, and the year that followed
The evidence on stopping is better than the evidence on almost anything else in this field, because somebody deliberately randomised it.
TheCompound Journal
Reporting on incretins, compounding & the peptide supply chain
Page 21 of 25 of this archive, newest first.
The evidence on stopping is better than the evidence on almost anything else in this field, because somebody deliberately randomised it.
Efficacy was never the question in this appraisal. Duration of treatment was.
Three randomised withdrawal designs have tested what happens when treatment stops. Their results are consistent and they are consistently misreported.
Efficacy was never the question in this appraisal. Duration of treatment was.
Efficacy was never the question in this appraisal. Duration of treatment was.
Efficacy was never the question in this appraisal. Duration of treatment was.
What a verification mark would have to carry to be checkable: a date, a lot, a method, a submitter and a link to the report.
Efficacy was never the question in this appraisal. Duration of treatment was.
Efficacy was never the question in this appraisal. Duration of treatment was.
Efficacy was never the question in this appraisal. Duration of treatment was.
Every withdrawal trial compared full dose against nothing. The clinically interesting comparison — full dose against a reduced one — has not been randomised.
Efficacy was never the question in this appraisal. Duration of treatment was.
Every step between the laboratory report and the product page removes information, and the badge is the last step.
Real-world persistence figures, with their definitions stated, because the definitions are doing most of the work.
Efficacy was never the question in this appraisal. Duration of treatment was.
A result on one vial generalises to a batch only if the vial was drawn in a way that makes it representative — and nobody records how it was drawn.
Duplicate submissions under different names test within-laboratory repeatability, which is a different quantity from between-laboratory reproducibility.
Efficacy was never the question in this appraisal. Duration of treatment was.
Efficacy was never the question in this appraisal. Duration of treatment was.
The evidence on stopping is better than the evidence on almost anything else in this field, because somebody deliberately randomised it.