DataDave said:Worth stating the units and the reference range whenever you post a number here.
This is where I part company with the consensus forming above. Filing an objection on the n=1 problem. Personal experience is genuine evidence about one person and very weak evidence about anybody else, and this thread keeps promoting the first into the second.
DataDave said:Worth stating the units and the reference range whenever you post a number here.
That is right, and it stops being right at the edges. The general case is well behaved; the interesting cases in this thread are all at the boundary where the general case breaks.
DataDave said:Worth stating the units and the reference range whenever you post a number here.
Bookmarking. The distinction being drawn above is the one nobody else makes. Printing the relevant bit and taking it with me.
Trusted third-party HPLC & mass spectrometry analysis. Verify peptide purity with the lab the community relies on. Independent. Accurate. Transparent.
Verify Your PeptidesEst. 1998. The synthesis house behind the vials you send for testing. ISO 9001 and cGMP certified, 1,500+ staff, batch-specific COA with every order.
Browse GL BiochemFrom 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.
Dr.RaviCardio 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.
This matches mine closely enough to be worth saying so out loud.