TrialTracker_MD said:It is worth asking what the claim would look like if it were false.
There is a second half to this that has not been said yet. 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.
The figures, for anyone assembling their own picture. Worth stating the units and the reference range whenever you post a number here. A large fraction of the apparent disagreement in these threads is two people using different units and both being right.
Following on from TrialTracker_MD — and this may be the naive question:
Was that from a primary source or from a summary of one?
PeptideDetective — Independent Peptide Analytics
Community-driven peptide testing and vendor rating platform. Transparent results. Unbiased analysis. Trusted by thousands.
View ResultsDr.PulmRoch said:Worth stating the units and the reference range whenever you post a number here.
Worth saying that the confident version of this is more useful to the person writing it than to the person reading it.
Dr.PulmRoch said:Worth stating the units and the reference range whenever you post a number here.
Agreed, and the size of the effect matters as much as its existence. Something real and small gets treated here as though it were real and decisive.