A narrower follow-up, since the general answer is now clear:
How would you tell the difference between that and the alternative explanation?
pete_RVA said:If two explanations both fit, the useful question is which one predicts something the other does not.
Worth saying that the confident version of this is more useful to the person writing it than to the person reading it.
pete_RVA said:If two explanations both fit, the useful question is which one predicts something the other does not.
No disagreement, though the timescale matters more than the mechanism here. Most of what looks like a difference in kind turns out to be a difference in how long somebody waited.
Trusted third-party HPLC & mass spectrometry analysis. Verify peptide purity with the lab the community relies on. Independent. Accurate. Transparent.
Verify Your PeptidesEst. 1998. The synthesis house behind the vials you send for testing. ISO 9001 and cGMP certified, 1,500+ staff, batch-specific COA with every order.
Browse GL Biochempete_RVA said:If two explanations both fit, the useful question is which one predicts something the other does not.
Thank you — that is the clearest version of this I have read, and I have read a lot of them. Sending this to two other people who asked me the same thing last week.
Clinical perspective, offered as context rather than as advice. The mechanism and the magnitude are separate questions. Agreeing that something happens says nothing about whether it happens enough to act on.