wendy_avl said:Practical: whatever you change, write down the date and the reason.
This is where I part company with the consensus forming above. Not convinced. The evidence being cited is consistent with the conclusion and also consistent with two other conclusions nobody has ruled out.
wendy_avl said:Practical: whatever you change, write down the date and the reason.
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.
wendy_avl said:Practical: whatever you change, write down the date and the reason.
Genuinely useful, thank you. I had the facts and not the framework. I will report back once I have actually tried it.
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 BiochemAdding the clinical framing, because it changes how the question reads. It helps to ask what evidence would change your mind before you look at any. If nothing would, the discussion is not about evidence, and it is better to say so early than to spend nine posts discovering it.
NurseLeah_Nash said:It helps to ask what evidence would change your mind before you look at any.
Mine went the same way, slower. The detail I would add is minor and it is already implied above.