Following on from Dr.LipidDallas — and this may be the naive question:
How long did you give it before you decided it was working?
Following on from Dr.LipidDallas — and this may be the naive question:
How long did you give it before you decided it was working?
robert_kc 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.
I read this differently. The confidence in this thread is running ahead of the evidence, and I would rather the uncertainty were stated than smoothed over because it is unsatisfying.
robert_kc 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 right, and it stops being right at the edges. The general case is well behaved; the interesting cases in this thread are all at the boundary where the general case breaks.
Ask again with the specifics and you will get a better answer than this one.
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 Biochemrobert_kc 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.
Thank you for spelling out the reasoning rather than just the conclusion.
Adding the clinical framing, because it changes how the question reads. 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.
That is the short version; the long version is somebody else's post.