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.
Clinical perspective, offered as context rather than as advice. The mechanism and the magnitude are separate questions. Agreeing that something happens says nothing about whether it happens enough to act on.
GenomicsKate said:The mechanism and the magnitude are separate questions.
Mine went the same way, slower. I had assumed I was the exception until I read this.
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 BiochemGenomicsKate said:The mechanism and the magnitude are separate questions.
Coming at GenomicsKate’s question from a different direction. Most of what circulates confidently in this community traces back to one summary of one study, and the qualifier was dropped somewhere in the third retelling.
Moderator note: leaving this open. It is being argued well and the disagreement is the useful part. Report rather than reply if it drifts again.