One concrete data point for the thread. One practical note: write down what you did and when, before you need it. Reconstructing a timeline from memory three months later is how people end up unable to answer the one question that would have resolved it.
One thing that is still open after Dr.MetabolicMD’s answer:
Did your prescriber agree with that reading, and if not what was their objection?
dan_philly said:One practical note: write down what you did and when, before you need it.
Coming at dan_philly’s question from a different direction. 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.
Happy to go further on any of that.
Certified reference materials, analytical reagents, and research-grade standards for peptide verification. Trusted by laboratories worldwide.
Shop Reference StandardsReporting back.
Closing the loop. The answer turned out to depend on the detail I had left out of the opening post, which is a lesson about how to ask rather than about the subject.
Dr.DermMIA said:If two explanations both fit, the useful question is which one predicts something the other does not.
No disagreement with Dr.DermMIA. One condition attached. Yes, and the corollary is less popular: if the reasoning holds, it also holds where it produces an answer we do not like.
Ask again with the specifics and you will get a better answer than this one.