Dr.EndoEP 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.
This is my experience too, for whatever a second data point is worth. I had assumed I was the exception until I read this.
Dr.EndoEP 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.
There is a second half to this that has not been said yet. 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.
Adding the numbers, since they settle part of this. Say what you would expect to see if you were wrong, before you look. It is a small discipline and it changes what you notice.
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 BiochemFollowing on from Dr.EndoEP — and this may be the naive question:
What did you change at the same time, and can you separate the two now?
Dr.PeteFamMed said:Say what you would expect to see if you were wrong, before you look.
Filing a mild objection. Mild because I might be wrong; an objection because nobody has addressed the case that does not fit. This treats a plausible mechanism as a demonstrated one. Plausible is where you start looking, not where you stop.