DoseLogDan said:Say what you would expect to see if you were wrong, before you look.
Correct as far as it goes. The part it does not cover is what to do when the honest answer is "not enough data", which is more often than anyone likes.
If somebody has the primary source to hand I would rather cite it than paraphrase it.
DoseLogDan said:Say what you would expect to see if you were wrong, before you look.
Genuinely useful, thank you. I had the facts and not the framework. Taking it to my next appointment.
Adding the clinical framing, because it changes how the question reads. It helps to say which part of this you are uncertain about. A precise question gets a precise answer; a general one gets everybody’s favourite anecdote.
Community-driven peptide testing and vendor rating platform. Transparent results. Unbiased analysis. Trusted by thousands.
View ResultsDr.ReproEndo said:It helps to say which part of this you are uncertain about.
This matches mine closely enough to be worth saying so out loud. The detail I would add is minor and it is already implied above.
Dr.ReproEndo said:It helps to say which part of this you are uncertain about.
Coming at Dr.ReproEndo’s question from a different direction. 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.