Dr.ObesityLA said:The distinction that resolves most of these threads is between what is true on average and what is true for one person.
There is a second half to this that has not been said yet. It is worth asking what the claim would look like if it were false. If nothing would look different, it is not a claim about the world and no amount of discussion will settle it.
I would rather be corrected than agreed with, if it comes to it.
The figures, for anyone assembling their own picture. Keep the original post as written when you update it, and add the correction underneath. An edited-away mistake is invisible to the next person who makes it.
Moderator note: reminder that nothing in this thread is medical advice, and that clinical claims need a source. Thread quality here is what the rules are for. Keep it up.
Janoshik Analytical — Independent Testing
Trusted third-party HPLC & mass spectrometry analysis. Verify peptide purity with the lab the community relies on. Independent. Accurate. Transparent.
Verify Your PeptidesGL Biochem (Shanghai) Ltd. — Direct Manufacturer
Est. 1998. The synthesis house behind the vials you send for testing. ISO 9001 and cGMP certified, 1,500+ staff, batch-specific COA with every order.
Browse GL Biochemdan_philly said:Keep the original post as written when you update it, and add the correction underneath.
I read this differently from dan_philly, on substance rather than tone. Filing an objection on the n=1 problem. Personal experience is genuine evidence about one person and very weak evidence about anybody else, and this thread keeps promoting the first into the second.
dan_philly said:Keep the original post as written when you update it, and add the correction underneath.
dan_philly has the substance of this right. The condition it depends on is worth stating. Yes, and the corollary is less popular: if the reasoning holds, it also holds where it produces an answer we do not like.