hank_denver said:Say what you would expect to see if you were wrong, before you look.
I read this differently. The confidence in this thread is running ahead of the evidence, and I would rather the uncertainty were stated than smoothed over because it is unsatisfying.
hank_denver said:Say what you would expect to see if you were wrong, before you look.
True, and it depends on a baseline nobody has stated. Without knowing where someone started, the same number can be an excellent result or a disappointing one.
hank_denver said:Say what you would expect to see if you were wrong, before you look.
That reframing is the part I needed. I will report back once I have actually tried it.
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 BiochemClinical perspective, offered as context rather than as advice. 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.
Dr.KarenChen 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.
Second this. Nothing to add that would improve it.