labquiet_amy said:One habit that pays for itself: post the method alongside the number.
Thank you — that is the clearest version of this I have read, and I have read a lot of them.
Adding the clinical framing, because it changes how the question reads. There is a difference between no evidence and evidence of no effect, and this subject is one where the two get swapped freely in both directions.
Dr.KarenChen said:There is a difference between no evidence and evidence of no effect, and this subject is one where the two get swapped freely in both directions.
Same pattern here, and in the same order. The detail I would add is minor and it is already implied above.
Trusted third-party HPLC & mass spectrometry analysis. Verify peptide purity with the lab the community relies on. Independent. Accurate. Transparent.
Verify Your PeptidesEst. 1998. The synthesis house behind the vials you send for testing. ISO 9001 and cGMP certified, 1,500+ staff, batch-specific COA with every order.
Browse GL BiochemDr.KarenChen said:There is a difference between no evidence and evidence of no effect, and this subject is one where the two get swapped freely in both directions.
Coming at Dr.KarenChen’s question from a different direction. The version of this that has an answer is narrower than the version being asked. Narrow it and it becomes tractable; leave it broad and the thread will produce nine confident and incompatible replies.
Adding the numbers, since they settle part of this. Give anything pharmacological four weeks before you judge it, and give anything measured weekly a four-point rolling average before you call it a trend.