Peptide Sciences was great before shutdown — my results so far

DeniseRN_TPA said:

If two explanations both fit, the useful question is which one predicts something the other does not.

There is a second half to this that has not been said yet. Start from the measurement rather than the conclusion. Almost every disagreement here turns out to be two people measuring different things and comparing the numbers anyway.

One concrete data point for the thread. For anyone reading later: the numbers in this thread are worth checking against a primary source before you act on them, including mine. Half the figures circulating in this community trace back to a secondary summary that dropped a qualifier.

Following on from DeniseRN_TPA — and this may be the naive question:

What did you change at the same time, and can you separate the two now?

HPLC_Greg said:

For anyone reading later: the numbers in this thread are worth checking against a primary source before you act on them, including mine.

This is where I part company with the consensus forming above. This treats a plausible mechanism as a demonstrated one. Plausible is where you start looking, not where you stop.

Reporting back.

Update — I was wrong in the opening post, specifically about the direction. Correcting it here rather than editing it away.