It feels like progress when I have a normal period.
Ok, if you’re male (and maybe if you’re female) this will be TMI. So skip down a paragraph or two.
Since I’ve been on the Wiley Protocol, I haven’t had a “normal” period. At first they were really heavy and inconvenient…and then they didn’t show up till 8 or 9 days after they were supposed to, plus they were really heavy and inconvenient. But THIS TIME is consistent with most of my life. On time, and then heavy on day 1, and then light. And then over. I can’t speak for the duration right now…cuz it’s only day 2. But all signs point to “normal.”
I don’t know what to do anymore. And honestly, I’m not looking for advice. Feel free to give it, but it will likely be disregarded. My ONLY criteria now for changing my life and the life of my child will be peer reviewed research. YES, I know that means I may be missing out on some cutting-edge stuff…some stuff that no one has had time to study, or (worse) no one has bothered to study because they stood to make a profit.
One of the things I’ve done wrong up til now was trust the research of others. For example, Jack Kruse has citations after his blog posts (which looks mighty scientific, I must say). It doesn’t mean the citations refer to peer-reviewed, double-blind studies, which have been replicated and have demonstrated ANYTHING of consequence. Often, if you check his citations he just links to an entire book on Amazon – no page number, no context. The purpose of naming your sources is so you can check up on the author (in this case, Kruse) to see if he’s full of crap. I’m not going to read an entire 317 page book to find out if he’s full of crap. Many of his citations are also junk articles off the internet (not science) and some dude’s ramblings about his theories (also not science).
You know, before I was in a scientific field, I didn’t fully understand what real research was…so for a moment here, let’s talk about that.
True science is rigorous. It involves peer-review, which means experts in the field of study (peers) actually review the article (study) and rate many aspects of it before it has the chance of being published. If it does not appear to be scientifically sound and unbiased, it doesn’t pass peer-review, and it doesn’t end up getting into that journal (and later on Yahoo News). “Double-blind” means that neither the experimenters nor those experimented on know what the hell is going on with the study…so they can’t accidentally influence it with their own beliefs or hopes for the outcome of the study.
In other words, I’ve become convinced that anecdotes (personal stories) don’t cut it anymore.
And YES I know some science is manipulated by corporations.
But geez….it’s better than nothing. And this try-anything approach I’ve been following is expensive…and its not working.