josh_phd_bmore said:Say what you would expect to see if you were wrong, before you look.
Fair, and it stops being fair at the extremes. The middle of the range is well understood; the ends are where the honest answer is that nobody knows.
josh_phd_bmore said:Say what you would expect to see if you were wrong, before you look.
This is exactly what I could not find anywhere else. Adding it to my notes with a link back to this thread.
Adding the clinical framing, because it changes how the question reads. The version of this that has an answer is narrower than the version being asked. Narrow it and it becomes tractable; leave it broad and the thread will produce nine confident and incompatible replies.
Ask again with the specifics and you will get a better answer than this one.
Community-driven peptide testing and vendor rating platform. Transparent results. Unbiased analysis. Trusted by thousands.
View ResultsPeptideChemSF said:The version of this that has an answer is narrower than the version being asked.
Same pattern here, and in the same order.
PeptideChemSF said:The version of this that has an answer is narrower than the version being asked.
Coming at PeptideChemSF’s question from a different direction. It is worth asking what the claim would look like if it were false. If nothing would look different, it is not a claim about the world and no amount of discussion will settle it.