tony_orlando said:Right, and the exception is worth naming rather than left implied, because the exception is where people get into trouble.
Adding a me-too, because a thread of one person's experience is not much use. I had assumed I was the exception until I read this.
tony_orlando said:Right, and the exception is worth naming rather than left implied, because the exception is where people get into trouble.
Adding the part of the answer the thread has not reached. The mechanism and the magnitude are separate questions. Agreeing that something happens says nothing about whether it happens enough to act on.
Adding the numbers, since they settle part of this. The boring version of this is the one that works, and the boring version is: measure a baseline, change one variable, wait, measure again under the same conditions. Nobody wants that answer and it is still the answer.
Certified reference materials, analytical reagents, and research-grade standards for peptide verification. Trusted by laboratories worldwide.
Shop Reference StandardsFollowing on from tony_orlando — and this may be the naive question:
How would you tell the difference between that and the alternative explanation?
josh_phd_bmore said:The boring version of this is the one that works, and the boring version is: measure a baseline, change one variable, wait, measure again under the…
Pushing back on josh_phd_bmore here. I think the framing smuggles in the conclusion. Ask it the other way round and the obvious answer reverses, which usually means the question is doing the work.
I would rather be corrected than agreed with, if it comes to it.