lisa_labSD said:One habit that pays for itself: post the method alongside the number.
Thank you for spelling out the reasoning rather than just the conclusion.
Adding the clinical framing, because it changes how the question reads. The distinction that resolves most of these threads is between what is true on average and what is true for one person. Both are real; they answer different questions and get quoted as if they were the same one.
I would rather be corrected than agreed with, if it comes to it.
Dr.GastroMayo said:The distinction that resolves most of these threads is between what is true on average and what is true for one person.
Adding a me-too, because a thread of one person's experience is not much use. The detail I would add is minor and it is already implied above.
Community-driven peptide testing and vendor rating platform. Transparent results. Unbiased analysis. Trusted by thousands.
View ResultsDr.GastroMayo said:The distinction that resolves most of these threads is between what is true on average and what is true for one person.
Coming at Dr.GastroMayo’s question from a different direction. 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.
Adding the numbers, since they settle part of this. If you are comparing against somebody else’s result, check that you are comparing the same measurement taken the same way. Most of the apparent contradictions in these threads dissolve at that step.
Happy to go further on any of that.