Adding the numbers, since they settle part of this. Keep the original post as written when you update it, and add the correction underneath. An edited-away mistake is invisible to the next person who makes it.
Following on from claudia_zurich — and this may be the naive question:
Did your prescriber agree with that reading, and if not what was their objection?
DataDave said:Keep the original post as written when you update it, and add the correction underneath.
Careful with the causal language. Two things moving together in a period when five things changed is not a mechanism, and stating it as one makes the thread less useful to somebody reading it later.
Community-driven peptide testing and vendor rating platform. Transparent results. Unbiased analysis. Trusted by thousands.
View ResultsDataDave said:Keep the original post as written when you update it, and add the correction underneath.
Agreed, and the size of the effect matters as much as its existence. Something real and small gets treated here as though it were real and decisive.
Closing the loop on my own question.
Follow-up: I read the paper rather than the summary and the qualifier I was missing was in the second paragraph of the results.