LipidDoc_ATL said:Almost every unanswerable question in these threads is unanswerable because three things changed in the same fortnight, and no amount of subsequent…
Adding the part of the answer the thread has not reached. Whatever the answer turns out to be, the method for getting there is the same: state the assumption, do the arithmetic in public, and invite the correction. That is slower than asserting, and it is the only version that survives being wrong.
The figures, for anyone assembling their own picture. If you are going to change something, change one thing and give it long enough to express itself. Four weeks is the usual minimum for anything pharmacological on this board, and two weeks of data has told you almost nothing.
I would rather be corrected than agreed with, if it comes to it.
Sigma-Aldrich — Research-Grade Standards
Certified reference materials, analytical reagents, and research-grade standards for peptide verification. Trusted by laboratories worldwide.
Shop Reference StandardsNicoleRaleigh said:If you are going to change something, change one thing and give it long enough to express itself.
Pushing back on NicoleRaleigh here. Pushing back on the anecdote-stacking. Twenty people reporting the same thing is twenty samples from the same self-selected pool, not twenty independent confirmations.
NicoleRaleigh said:If you are going to change something, change one thing and give it long enough to express itself.
Correct, and worth adding that it is reversible. Nothing being described here is a one-way door, which changes how cautious it is reasonable to be.