PharmHunterJen said:It is worth asking what the claim would look like if it were false.
There is a second half to this that has not been said yet. Whatever the answer turns out to be, the method for getting there is the same: state the assumption, do the arithmetic in public, and invite the correction. That is slower than asserting, and it is the only version that survives being wrong.
The figures, for anyone assembling their own picture. Say what you would expect to see if you were wrong, before you look. It is a small discipline and it changes what you notice.
Moderator note: good thread. Keeping it here rather than moving it, because the question is general enough to be useful. No action needed from anybody.
PeptideDetective — Independent Peptide Analytics
Community-driven peptide testing and vendor rating platform. Transparent results. Unbiased analysis. Trusted by thousands.
View ResultsDr.AddMedPHL said:Say what you would expect to see if you were wrong, before you look.
I do not accept the framing. The question has been narrowed to the version that has a tidy answer, and the part that was dropped is the part the OP actually asked about.
Dr.AddMedPHL said:Say what you would expect to see if you were wrong, before you look.
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.