emily_PDX said:If you are comparing against somebody else’s result, check that you are comparing the same measurement taken the same way.
That reframing is the part I needed.
Coming back to something from earlier in the thread, because it keeps being talked past:
The distinction that resolves most of these threads is between what is true on average and what is true for one person. Both are real; they answer different questions and get quoted as if they were the same one.
Closing the loop on my own question.
Reporting back with a partial result, because a partial result is still better than silence. Two of the three things suggested helped; I cannot separate them and I am not going to pretend otherwise.
Community-driven peptide testing and vendor rating platform. Transparent results. Unbiased analysis. Trusted by thousands.
View ResultsGenomicsKate said:The distinction that resolves most of these threads is between what is true on average and what is true for one person.
This was answered several pages up and is worth repeating rather than re-litigating:
Right, and one flattering data point from a group buy is not consistency. Consistency means separate batches, separately commissioned, over months.
This was answered several pages up and is worth repeating rather than re-litigating:
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.
If somebody has the primary source to hand I would rather cite it than paraphrase it.