Clinical perspective, offered as context rather than as advice. 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.
Following on from LibrarianMeg — and this may be the naive question:
How would you tell the difference between that and the alternative explanation?
Dr.PathRoch said:If two explanations both fit, the useful question is which one predicts something the other does not.
Worth saying that the confident version of this is more useful to the person writing it than to the person reading it.
Trusted third-party HPLC & mass spectrometry analysis. Verify peptide purity with the lab the community relies on. Independent. Accurate. Transparent.
Verify Your PeptidesEst. 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 BiochemDr.PathRoch said:If two explanations both fit, the useful question is which one predicts something the other does not.
Correct, and worth adding that it is reversible. Nothing being described here is a one-way door, which changes how cautious it is reasonable to be.
Correct me if the detail matters more than I have assumed.