From the other side of the consultation, briefly. 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.
If somebody has the primary source to hand I would rather cite it than paraphrase it.
SleepDoc_PDX said:If you are going to change something, change one thing and give it long enough to express itself.
Thank you for spelling out the reasoning rather than just the conclusion.
Adding the clinical framing, because it changes how the question reads. It is worth asking what the claim would look like if it were false. If nothing would look different, it is not a claim about the world and no amount of discussion will settle it.
Sigma-Aldrich — Research-Grade Standards
Certified reference materials, analytical reagents, and research-grade standards for peptide verification. Trusted by laboratories worldwide.
Shop Reference StandardsPedsEndoPhilly said:It is worth asking what the claim would look like if it were false.
This matches mine closely enough to be worth saying so out loud.