Adding the clinical framing, because it changes how the question reads. 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.
Dr.LipidDallas said:If two explanations both fit, the useful question is which one predicts something the other does not.
Filing a mild objection. Mild because I might be wrong; an objection because nobody has addressed the case that does not fit. I would resist the confidence. Half of what this board was certain about two years ago has since been quietly dropped, and nobody went back to correct the threads.
Dr.LipidDallas said:If two explanations both fit, the useful question is which one predicts something the other does not.
Agreed, and the size of the effect matters as much as its existence. Something real and small gets treated here as though it were real and decisive.
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 BiochemDr.LipidDallas said:If two explanations both fit, the useful question is which one predicts something the other does not.
This answered a question I did not know how to ask.
Moderator note: good thread. Keeping it here rather than moving it, because the question is general enough to be useful. No action needed from anybody.