Dr.PulmRoch said:Say what you would expect to see if you were wrong, before you look.
Agreed, with the usual condition: that holds for the average and this board is a collection of individuals. A population claim and a personal prediction are different things and get quoted interchangeably.
Dr.PulmRoch said:Say what you would expect to see if you were wrong, before you look.
Saving this. It is the first explanation that did not require me to already understand it. I will report back once I have actually tried it.
From the other side of the consultation, briefly. It is worth asking what the claim would look like if it were false. If nothing would look different, it is not a claim about the world and no amount of discussion will settle it.
That is the short version; the long version is somebody else's post.
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 BiochemSarahChen_PharmD said:It is worth asking what the claim would look like if it were false.
Same experience, arrived at from the opposite direction. The detail I would add is minor and it is already implied above.
SarahChen_PharmD said:It is worth asking what the claim would look like if it were false.
There is a second half to this that has not been said yet. Worth answering the question that was asked rather than the one behind it. The narrow version usually has an answer; the broad version usually does not, and answering the broad one is how a thread stops being useful.