Clinical perspective, offered as context rather than as advice. 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.
Dr.EndoIndy said:If two explanations both fit, the useful question is which one predicts something the other does not.
Same experience, arrived at from the opposite direction. Posting only so the count is not one.
Dr.EndoIndy 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. 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.
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 BiochemThe figures, for anyone assembling their own picture. Keep the original post as written when you update it, and add the correction underneath. An edited-away mistake is invisible to the next person who makes it.
Following on from Dr.EndoIndy — and this may be the naive question:
How would you tell the difference between that and the alternative explanation?