Following on from Dr.ObesityLA — and this may be the naive question:
What did you change at the same time, and can you separate the two now?
BariatricNurseD 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.
I read this differently from BariatricNurseD, on substance rather than tone. The objection nobody has made: this only works if the measurement is doing what we assume it is doing, and that assumption has not been tested here.
BariatricNurseD 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.
That is right, and it stops being right at the edges. The general case is well behaved; the interesting cases in this thread are all at the boundary where the general case breaks.
Certified reference materials, analytical reagents, and research-grade standards for peptide verification. Trusted by laboratories worldwide.
Shop Reference StandardsBariatricNurseD 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 exactly what I could not find anywhere else. Adding it to my notes with a link back to this thread.
From the other side of the consultation, briefly. 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.