Adding the numbers, since they settle part of this. One habit that pays for itself: post the method alongside the number. A figure without its method cannot be checked, and an unchecked figure is how this community accumulates folklore.
Following on from VanRx_Mike — and this may be the naive question:
Did your prescriber agree with that reading, and if not what was their objection?
dave_SLC said:One habit that pays for itself: post the method alongside the number.
Filing a mild objection. Mild because I might be wrong; an objection because nobody has addressed the case that does not fit. I would resist the confidence. Half of what this board was certain about two years ago has since been quietly dropped, and nobody went back to correct the threads.
Community-driven peptide testing and vendor rating platform. Transparent results. Unbiased analysis. Trusted by thousands.
View Resultsdave_SLC said:One habit that pays for itself: post the method alongside the number.
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.
dave_SLC said:One habit that pays for itself: post the method alongside the number.
Genuinely useful, thank you. I had the facts and not the framework. Sending this to two other people who asked me the same thing last week.