BariatricNurseD said:There is a difference between no evidence and evidence of no effect, and this subject is one where the two get swapped freely in both directions.
That is correct as far as it goes, and here is where it stops going. Yes, and the corollary is less popular: if the reasoning holds, it also holds where it produces an answer we do not like.
tony_orlando said:Agreed, with a caveat about community reputation: it is a lagging indicator.
Saving this. It is the first explanation that did not require me to already understand it. Adding it to my notes with a link back to this thread.
BariatricNurseD said:There is a difference between no evidence and evidence of no effect, and this subject is one where the two get swapped freely in both directions.
Careful with the causal language. Two things moving together in a period when five things changed is not a mechanism, and stating it as one makes the thread less useful to somebody reading it later.
Happy to go further on any of that.
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 BiochemOne concrete data point for the thread. 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.