Dr.PathRoch said: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…
Worth saying that the confident version of this is more useful to the person writing it than to the person reading it.
Dr.PathRoch said: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…
Correct as far as it goes. The part it does not cover is what to do when the honest answer is "not enough data", which is more often than anyone likes.
Moderator note: leaving this open. It is being argued well and the disagreement is the useful part. Tagging this one for the weekly digest.
Certified reference materials, analytical reagents, and research-grade standards for peptide verification. Trusted by laboratories worldwide.
Shop Reference StandardsClinical perspective, offered as context rather than as advice. The honest answer is that the effect is real, the magnitude is contested, and the individual variation is larger than either. Those three things can all be true at once, and most arguments here are two people holding different parts of that.
hans_munich said:The honest answer is that the effect is real, the magnitude is contested, and the individual variation is larger than either.
Can confirm. Same sequence, different timescale.