Dr.NutriCornell said:It helps to ask what evidence would change your mind before you look at any.
This is my experience too, for whatever a second data point is worth. Nothing to add that would improve it.
Dr.NutriCornell said:It helps to ask what evidence would change your mind before you look at any.
Adding the part of the answer the thread has not reached. Whatever the answer turns out to be, the method for getting there is the same: state the assumption, do the arithmetic in public, and invite the correction. That is slower than asserting, and it is the only version that survives being wrong.
The figures, for anyone assembling their own picture. Practical: whatever you change, write down the date and the reason. In three months the reason is what you will have forgotten, and the reason is what makes the record worth having.
Community-driven peptide testing and vendor rating platform. Transparent results. Unbiased analysis. Trusted by thousands.
View ResultsFollowing on from Dr.NutriCornell — and this may be the naive question:
Did your prescriber agree with that reading, and if not what was their objection?
PeptideSynthNJ said:Practical: whatever you change, write down the date and the reason.
Filing a mild objection. Mild because I might be wrong; an objection because nobody has addressed the case that does not fit. The counter-case has not been addressed. Somebody upthread described the situation that does not fit, and the thread moved on rather than engaging with it, which is the failure mode this board is supposed to avoid.
I would rather be corrected than agreed with, if it comes to it.