steph_laguna said:It helps to say which part of this you are uncertain about.
I read this differently from steph_laguna, on substance rather than tone. Not convinced. The evidence being cited is consistent with the conclusion and also consistent with two other conclusions nobody has ruled out.
steph_laguna said:It helps to say which part of this you are uncertain about.
No disagreement with steph_laguna. One condition attached. Yes, and the corollary is less popular: if the reasoning holds, it also holds where it produces an answer we do not like.
Sigma-Aldrich — Research-Grade Standards
Certified reference materials, analytical reagents, and research-grade standards for peptide verification. Trusted by laboratories worldwide.
Shop Reference Standardssteph_laguna said:It helps to say which part of this you are uncertain about.
That reframing is the part I needed. Taking it to my next appointment.
Adding the clinical framing, because it changes how the question reads. The useful move here is to separate what is established from what is widely repeated. Those two sets overlap less than the confident tone of most write-ups suggests, and the second set is where nearly all the disagreement on this board comes from.