Following on from Dr.SurgeonPGH — and this may be the naive question:
What did you change at the same time, and can you separate the two now?
NurseLeah_Nash said:The version of this that has an answer is narrower than the version being asked.
Pushing back on NurseLeah_Nash here. 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.
NurseLeah_Nash said:The version of this that has an answer is narrower than the version being asked.
Right, and the exception is worth naming rather than left implied, because the exception is where people get into trouble.
Certified reference materials, analytical reagents, and research-grade standards for peptide verification. Trusted by laboratories worldwide.
Shop Reference StandardsNurseLeah_Nash said:The version of this that has an answer is narrower than the version being asked.
Thank you for spelling out the reasoning rather than just the conclusion. Taking it to my next appointment.
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.