Following on from PedsEndoPhilly — and this may be the naive question:
How to read a result like this without either dismissing it or over-reading it, since the summaries all read like press releases?
Dr.EM_Chicago said:The gap between trial results and real-world results is consistent and it is not fraud.
Worth saying that the confident version of this is more useful to the person writing it than to the person reading it.
Dr.EM_Chicago said:The gap between trial results and real-world results is consistent and it is not fraud.
No disagreement, though it depends on where somebody is starting from, and this thread has been assuming a starting point nobody stated.
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.EM_Chicago said:The gap between trial results and real-world results is consistent and it is not fraud.
Genuinely useful, thank you. I had the facts and not the framework. I will report back once I have actually tried it.
Adding the clinical framing, because it changes how the question reads. The version of this that has an answer is narrower than the version being asked. Narrow it and it becomes tractable; leave it broad and the thread will produce nine confident and incompatible replies.