[Discussion] the log advice in here is 3 years out of date
Thinking out loud about this: the log advice in here is 3 years out of date.
Hard numbers: 3 years. Anything softer than that is flagged as an impression.
A log is a record of what you did. It is not a protocol, and posting one as a schedule for other members is a different thing that this board does not do.
Kept one line a week for 20 months. It was pointless for the first eight weeks and then it was the most useful document I owned.
Not medical advice, obviously, and nothing here is approved for human use. One person with a spreadsheet.
best — the order this archive was captured in
Added the Log flair and a date range to the title so it is findable later.
Did anything else change in the window you are asking about?
Annotation is what makes a log survive contact with your future self. A single note beside an unusual week saves an hour of puzzled reconstruction later.
Is the concentration recorded anywhere in the log?
Annotated the fortnight I changed training. Without that note the numbers around it would look like a mystery.
the column you will wish you had is sleep
Exported the whole thing to a plain text file after nearly losing it in an app that shut down.
What is the one column you added late and wish you had from the start?
Reconstructed six weeks from memory once and later found receipts that contradicted my own log. Never again.
Not convinced by the retrospective reconstruction. Memory smooths things and the smoothing is systematic.
Not convinced by the retrospective reconstruction.
Disagreeing with this bit: daily weighing gives you noise and costs you something.
Wrote the concentration into the log as well as on the vial. Have referred back to it more than once.
log what you did, not what you meant to do
retrospective logs drift, contemporaneous ones do not
Wrote the concentration into the log as well as on the vial.
Adding the column everyone adds late — sleep. Start with it.
Small fix — that is a reconstructed entry rather than a contemporaneous one, and the post presents it as the latter.
A log is only interpretable if the conditions are consistent. Same day, same time, same state, same scale — otherwise you are recording measurement variability rather than change.
Choose a format you will still be able to open in two years. Plain text or a spreadsheet you export beats an application that may not exist.
Choose a format you will still be able to open in two years.
This is the whole discipline in one line. Contemporaneous, consistent, minimal.
Missing entries recorded as blanks preserve the shape of the series. Dropping them silently makes the remaining points look more regular than they were.
Yes — write the concentration in the log as well as on the vial. Belt and braces and it costs nothing.
consistent conditions or you are logging noise
Cosigning on missed weeks. Leaving them blank makes the whole series misleading.
Cosigning on missed weeks.
mei_cardoso is right about blanks. Silent gaps make the series lie.
Cosigning on missed weeks.
Agreed — and the payoff genuinely arrives in month six, not week two.
export it somewhere you will still be able to read in two years
- 1Not convinced by the retrospective reconstruction. Memory smooths things and…7 comments in this branch · started by u/arne_ndiaye
- 2Yes — write the concentration in the log as well as on the vial. Belt and…6 comments in this branch · started by u/rosa_sandvik