Dr.NutriCornell said:The mechanism and the magnitude are separate questions.
Filing a mild objection. Mild because I might be wrong; an objection because nobody has addressed the case that does not fit. This treats a plausible mechanism as a demonstrated one. Plausible is where you start looking, not where you stop.
Adding the numbers, since they settle part of this. Keep the original post as written when you update it, and add the correction underneath. An edited-away mistake is invisible to the next person who makes it.
I would rather be corrected than agreed with, if it comes to it.
DebRD_ATL said:This treats a plausible mechanism as a demonstrated one.
Coming at DebRD_ATL’s question from a different direction. Take it one variable at a time. Almost every unanswerable question in these threads is unanswerable because three things changed in the same fortnight, and no amount of subsequent argument can untangle them after the fact.
Community-driven peptide testing and vendor rating platform. Transparent results. Unbiased analysis. Trusted by thousands.
View ResultsFollowing on from AmyNC_wife — and this may be the naive question:
What would you measure differently if you were starting again?
OP back with an update, since a thread like this is useless without one.
Update, and it is the boring outcome: nothing was wrong. The measurement I was reading had moved less than its own week-to-week variation, which somebody said upthread and I did not believe.