TomFromTexas said:Agreed, and one caution: a single measurement is not a measurement.
This is my experience too, for whatever a second data point is worth. The detail I would add is minor and it is already implied above.
TomFromTexas said:Agreed, and one caution: a single measurement is not a measurement.
There is a second half to this that has not been said yet. It helps to ask what evidence would change your mind before you look at any. If nothing would, the discussion is not about evidence, and it is better to say so early than to spend nine posts discovering it.
Adding the numbers, since they settle part of this. The boring version of this is the one that works, and the boring version is: measure a baseline, change one variable, wait, measure again under the same conditions. Nobody wants that answer and it is still the answer.
Community-driven peptide testing and vendor rating platform. Transparent results. Unbiased analysis. Trusted by thousands.
View ResultsFollowing on from TomFromTexas — and this may be the naive question:
Was that from a primary source or from a summary of one?
dan_philly said:The boring version of this is the one that works, and the boring version is: measure a baseline, change one variable, wait, measure again under the…
Careful with the causal language. Two things moving together in a period when five things changed is not a mechanism, and stating it as one makes the thread less useful to somebody reading it later.