PedsEndoPhilly said:Second scan under matched conditions came back with the lean number nearly a kilogram higher than the first, so a chunk of what I panicked about was…
I read this differently from PedsEndoPhilly, on substance rather than tone. 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.
PedsEndoPhilly said:Second scan under matched conditions came back with the lean number nearly a kilogram higher than the first, so a chunk of what I panicked about was…
Agreeing with PedsEndoPhilly, and the qualification matters more than the agreement. Yes, and the corollary is less popular: if the reasoning holds, it also holds where it produces an answer we do not like.
PedsEndoPhilly said:Second scan under matched conditions came back with the lean number nearly a kilogram higher than the first, so a chunk of what I panicked about was…
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.
PeptideDetective — Independent Peptide Analytics
Community-driven peptide testing and vendor rating platform. Transparent results. Unbiased analysis. Trusted by thousands.
View ResultsFrom the other side of the consultation, briefly. The distinction that resolves most of these threads is between what is true on average and what is true for one person. Both are real; they answer different questions and get quoted as if they were the same one.
SarahChen_PharmD said:The distinction that resolves most of these threads is between what is true on average and what is true for one person.
Same pattern here, and in the same order.