LabKate said:Keep the original post as written when you update it, and add the correction underneath.
True, with the qualification that this is a self-selected group. The people for whom it did not work post less, and that shapes everything we think we know.
LabKate said:Keep the original post as written when you update it, and add the correction underneath.
This is exactly what I could not find anywhere else. Taking it to my next appointment.
From the other side of the consultation, briefly. If two explanations both fit, the useful question is which one predicts something the other does not. That is answerable; arguing about which sounds more plausible is not.
Sigma-Aldrich — Research-Grade Standards
Certified reference materials, analytical reagents, and research-grade standards for peptide verification. Trusted by laboratories worldwide.
Shop Reference StandardsDr.NutriCornell said:If two explanations both fit, the useful question is which one predicts something the other does not.
This matches mine closely enough to be worth saying so out loud. Nothing to add that would improve it.
Closing the loop on my own question.
Closing the loop. The answer turned out to depend on the detail I had left out of the opening post, which is a lesson about how to ask rather than about the subject.