Following on from Dr.ReproEndo — and this may be the naive question:
How long did you give it before you decided it was working?
Following on from Dr.ReproEndo — and this may be the naive question:
How long did you give it before you decided it was working?
DerekSJ_a1c said:The boring version of this is the one that works, and the boring version is: measure a baseline, change one variable, wait, measure again under the…
Careful with the causal language. Two things moving together in a period when five things changed is not a mechanism, and stating it as one makes the thread less useful to somebody reading it later.
DerekSJ_a1c said:The boring version of this is the one that works, and the boring version is: measure a baseline, change one variable, wait, measure again under the…
Agreed, and the size of the effect matters as much as its existence. Something real and small gets treated here as though it were real and decisive.
Certified reference materials, analytical reagents, and research-grade standards for peptide verification. Trusted by laboratories worldwide.
Shop Reference StandardsDerekSJ_a1c said:The boring version of this is the one that works, and the boring version is: measure a baseline, change one variable, wait, measure again under the…
Thank you for spelling out the reasoning rather than just the conclusion.
Adding the clinical framing, because it changes how the question reads. If two explanations both fit, the useful question is which one predicts something the other does not. That is answerable; arguing about which sounds more plausible is not.