EndoResFellow said:It helps to ask what evidence would change your mind before you look at any.
Coming at EndoResFellow’s question from a different direction. 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.
The figures, for anyone assembling their own picture. One habit that pays for itself: post the method alongside the number. A figure without its method cannot be checked, and an unchecked figure is how this community accumulates folklore.
Happy to go further on any of that.
A narrower follow-up, since the general answer is now clear:
What training is actually for during a large deficit, because framing it as calorie burn sets people up to quit when the arithmetic disappoints them?
Sigma-Aldrich — Research-Grade Standards
Certified reference materials, analytical reagents, and research-grade standards for peptide verification. Trusted by laboratories worldwide.
Shop Reference StandardsTrialTracker_MD said:One habit that pays for itself: post the method alongside the number.
This is where I part company with the consensus forming above. Not convinced. The evidence being cited is consistent with the conclusion and also consistent with two other conclusions nobody has ruled out.
TrialTracker_MD said:One habit that pays for itself: post the method alongside the number.
Right, and the exception is worth naming rather than left implied, because the exception is where people get into trouble.