Adding the clinical framing, because it changes how the question reads. The distinction that resolves most of these threads is between what is true on average and what is true for one person. Both are real; they answer different questions and get quoted as if they were the same one.
That is the short version; the long version is somebody else's post.
KevinCompounds said:The distinction that resolves most of these threads is between what is true on average and what is true for one person.
Worth saying that the confident version of this is more useful to the person writing it than to the person reading it.
KevinCompounds said:The distinction that resolves most of these threads is between what is true on average and what is true for one person.
KevinCompounds has the substance of this right. The condition it depends on is worth stating. Yes, and the corollary is less popular: if the reasoning holds, it also holds where it produces an answer we do not like.
Correct me if the detail matters more than I have assumed.
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 BiochemKevinCompounds said:The distinction that resolves most of these threads is between what is true on average and what is true for one person.
This is exactly what I could not find anywhere else. Printing the relevant bit and taking it with me.