Asked to pay by a method with no recourse, by a supplier I had used twice before without being asked, which is what made me stop.
The question I want answered is how people are thinking about the trade-off between reversibility and privacy, because you cannot have both.
I have searched first, so if this is covered somewhere point me at it and I will read it.
Short answer first, then the reasoning. There is a difference between no evidence and evidence of no effect, and this subject is one where the two get swapped freely in both directions.
If somebody has the primary source to hand I would rather cite it than paraphrase it.
Dr.BariatricHTX said:There is a difference between no evidence and evidence of no effect, and this subject is one where the two get swapped freely in both directions.
That holds where the measurement is reliable. Where it is noisy — and a lot of what gets tracked here is noisy — the same reasoning produces confident nonsense.
PeptideDetective — Independent Peptide Analytics
Community-driven peptide testing and vendor rating platform. Transparent results. Unbiased analysis. Trusted by thousands.
View Resultsdave_SLC said:Asked to pay by a method with no recourse, by a supplier I had used twice before without being asked, which is what made me stop.
Same experience, arrived at from the opposite direction. Posting only so the count is not one.
Adding the clinical framing, because it changes how the question reads. If two explanations both fit, the useful question is which one predicts something the other does not. That is answerable; arguing about which sounds more plausible is not.