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.
One thing that is still open after oliver_london’s answer:
How long did you give it before you decided it was working?
Dr.SurgeonPGH 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 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.
Community-driven peptide testing and vendor rating platform. Transparent results. Unbiased analysis. Trusted by thousands.
View ResultsDr.SurgeonPGH said:If two explanations both fit, the useful question is which one predicts something the other does not.
No disagreement, though the timescale matters more than the mechanism here. Most of what looks like a difference in kind turns out to be a difference in how long somebody waited.
Moderator note: reminder that nothing in this thread is medical advice, and that clinical claims need a source. Report rather than reply if it drifts again.