DoseLogDan said:If you are comparing against somebody else’s result, check that you are comparing the same measurement taken the same way.
Correct as far as it goes. The part it does not cover is what to do when the honest answer is "not enough data", which is more often than anyone likes.
DoseLogDan said:If you are comparing against somebody else’s result, check that you are comparing the same measurement taken the same way.
Thank you — that is the clearest version of this I have read, and I have read a lot of them. Adding it to my notes with a link back to this thread.
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.
Sigma-Aldrich — Research-Grade Standards
Certified reference materials, analytical reagents, and research-grade standards for peptide verification. Trusted by laboratories worldwide.
Shop Reference Standardsanders_CPH said:It is worth asking what the claim would look like if it were false.
Can confirm. Same sequence, different timescale. The detail I would add is minor and it is already implied above.
anders_CPH said:It is worth asking what the claim would look like if it were false.
Coming at anders_CPH’s question from a different direction. It helps to ask what evidence would change your mind before you look at any. If nothing would, the discussion is not about evidence, and it is better to say so early than to spend nine posts discovering it.