BiostatsBrad said:One habit that pays for itself: post the method alongside the number.
Genuinely useful, thank you. I had the facts and not the framework. I will report back once I have actually tried it.
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.
Dr.ReproEndo said:If two explanations both fit, the useful question is which one predicts something the other does not.
Second 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 BiochemDr.ReproEndo said:If two explanations both fit, the useful question is which one predicts something the other does not.
Coming at Dr.ReproEndo’s question from a different direction. 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.
Closing the loop on my own question.
Follow-up — I put something in the gap where food used to be rather than waiting for the gap to close on its own. That was the part nobody told me.