MASHdoc_SA 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.
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.
tom_AK said: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.
Saving this. It is the first explanation that did not require me to already understand it.
MASHdoc_SA 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.
Pushing back on MASHdoc_SA here. 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. 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.
Moderator note: the sourcing question belongs in the vendor section and has been split out. Tagging this one for the weekly digest.