GenomicsKate said:The manufacturing argument is the underrated one.
Genuinely useful, thank you. I had the facts and not the framework. Taking it to my next appointment.
GenomicsKate said:The manufacturing argument is the underrated one.
Genuinely useful, thank you. I had the facts and not the framework. Taking it to my next appointment.
From the other side of the consultation, briefly. 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.
anna.melb_AU said:Worth answering the question that was asked rather than the one behind it.
Filing a mild objection. Mild because I might be wrong; an objection because nobody has addressed the case that does not fit. Filing an objection on the n=1 problem. Personal experience is genuine evidence about one person and very weak evidence about anybody else, and this thread keeps promoting the first into the second.
Certified reference materials, analytical reagents, and research-grade standards for peptide verification. Trusted by laboratories worldwide.
Shop Reference StandardsThe figures, for anyone assembling their own picture. If you are going to change something, change one thing and give it long enough to express itself. Four weeks is the usual minimum for anything pharmacological on this board, and two weeks of data has told you almost nothing.