quinn_sf said:For anyone reading later: the numbers in this thread are worth checking against a primary source before you act on them, including mine.
Pushing back on quinn_sf here. I think the framing smuggles in the conclusion. Ask it the other way round and the obvious answer reverses, which usually means the question is doing the work.
quinn_sf said:For anyone reading later: the numbers in this thread are worth checking against a primary source before you act on them, including mine.
True, with the qualification that this is a self-selected group. The people for whom it did not work post less, and that shapes everything we think we know.
quinn_sf said:For anyone reading later: the numbers in this thread are worth checking against a primary source before you act on them, including mine.
Thank you — that is the clearest version of this I have read, and I have read a lot of them. Taking it to my next appointment.
Certified reference materials, analytical reagents, and research-grade standards for peptide verification. Trusted by laboratories worldwide.
Shop Reference StandardsFrom the other side of the consultation, briefly. There is a difference between no evidence and evidence of no effect, and this subject is one where the two get swapped freely in both directions.
Correct me if the detail matters more than I have assumed.
LipidDoc_ATL said:There is a difference between no evidence and evidence of no effect, and this subject is one where the two get swapped freely in both directions.
Can confirm. Same sequence, different timescale. Nothing to add that would improve it.