Dr.ObesityMed said:If two explanations both fit, the useful question is which one predicts something the other does not.
That is right for the common case. Whether it is right for the case being asked about depends on a detail that has not been given.
maria_elpaso said:Agreed, with a caveat about community reputation: it is a lagging indicator.
Thank you — that is the clearest version of this I have read, and I have read a lot of them. Adding it to my notes with a link back to this thread.
Dr.ObesityMed said:If two explanations both fit, the useful question is which one predicts something the other does not.
This is where I part company with the consensus forming above. I would resist the confidence. Half of what this board was certain about two years ago has since been quietly dropped, and nobody went back to correct the threads.
PeptideDetective — Independent Peptide Analytics
Community-driven peptide testing and vendor rating platform. Transparent results. Unbiased analysis. Trusted by thousands.
View ResultsThe figures, for anyone assembling their own picture. For anyone reading later: the numbers in this thread are worth checking against a primary source before you act on them, including mine. Half the figures circulating in this community trace back to a secondary summary that dropped a qualifier.