BiostatsBrad said:Keep the original post as written when you update it, and add the correction underneath.
No disagreement, though it depends on where somebody is starting from, and this thread has been assuming a starting point nobody stated.
BiostatsBrad said:Keep the original post as written when you update it, and add the correction underneath.
This is exactly what I could not find anywhere else. Sending this to two other people who asked me the same thing last week.
Adding the clinical framing, because it changes how the question reads. The honest answer is that the effect is real, the magnitude is contested, and the individual variation is larger than either. Those three things can all be true at once, and most arguments here are two people holding different parts of that.
Community-driven peptide testing and vendor rating platform. Transparent results. Unbiased analysis. Trusted by thousands.
View ResultsDr.NutriCornell said:The honest answer is that the effect is real, the magnitude is contested, and the individual variation is larger than either.
Adding a me-too, because a thread of one person's experience is not much use.
Dr.NutriCornell said:The honest answer is that the effect is real, the magnitude is contested, and the individual variation is larger than either.
Coming at Dr.NutriCornell’s question from a different direction. Whatever the answer turns out to be, the method for getting there is the same: state the assumption, do the arithmetic in public, and invite the correction. That is slower than asserting, and it is the only version that survives being wrong.