BethLabQueen said:Say what you would expect to see if you were wrong, before you look.
No disagreement, though it depends on where somebody is starting from, and this thread has been assuming a starting point nobody stated.
BethLabQueen said:Say what you would expect to see if you were wrong, before you look.
Genuinely useful, thank you. I had the facts and not the framework.
From the other side of the consultation, briefly. 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.
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 Biochemclaudia_zurich said:It is worth asking what the claim would look like if it were false.
Adding a me-too, because a thread of one person's experience is not much use. Nothing to add that would improve it.
claudia_zurich said:It is worth asking what the claim would look like if it were false.
Adding the part of the answer the thread has not reached. The honest answer is that the effect is real, the magnitude is contested, and the individual variation is larger than either. Those three things can all be true at once, and most arguments here are two people holding different parts of that.