From the other side of the consultation, briefly. 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.
SleepDoc_PDX said:If two explanations both fit, the useful question is which one predicts something the other does not.
Second this. I had assumed I was the exception until I read this.
SleepDoc_PDX said:If two explanations both fit, the useful question is which one predicts something the other does not.
Adding the part of the answer the thread has not reached. Most of what circulates confidently in this community traces back to one summary of one study, and the qualifier was dropped somewhere in the third retelling.
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. One practical note: write down what you did and when, before you need it. Reconstructing a timeline from memory three months later is how people end up unable to answer the one question that would have resolved it.
If somebody has the primary source to hand I would rather cite it than paraphrase it.
Moderator note: a post naming a supplier has been edited. Discuss suppliers in the review sections, not here. Thread quality here is what the rules are for. Keep it up.