Dr.PainCLE said:It helps to ask what evidence would change your mind before you look at any.
Coming at Dr.PainCLE’s question from a different direction. Worth answering the question that was asked rather than the one behind it. The narrow version usually has an answer; the broad version usually does not, and answering the broad one is how a thread stops being useful.
One concrete data point for the thread. If you are comparing against somebody else’s result, check that you are comparing the same measurement taken the same way. Most of the apparent contradictions in these threads dissolve at that step.
Following on from Dr.PainCLE — and this may be the naive question:
Was that from a primary source or from a summary of one?
PeptideDetective — Independent Peptide Analytics
Community-driven peptide testing and vendor rating platform. Transparent results. Unbiased analysis. Trusted by thousands.
View ResultsLabKate said:If you are comparing against somebody else’s result, check that you are comparing the same measurement taken the same way.
Filing a mild objection. Mild because I might be wrong; an objection because nobody has addressed the case that does not fit. This treats a plausible mechanism as a demonstrated one. Plausible is where you start looking, not where you stop.
LabKate said:If you are comparing against somebody else’s result, check that you are comparing the same measurement taken the same way.
Agreed on the substance. I would put less weight on the timescale, because two months of anything is not enough to distinguish a trend from a wobble.