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.
Happy to go further on any of that.
From the other side of the consultation, briefly. The mechanism and the magnitude are separate questions. Agreeing that something happens says nothing about whether it happens enough to act on.
MASHdoc_SA said:The mechanism and the magnitude are separate questions.
Mine went the same way, slower. Posting only so the count is not one.
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 BiochemMASHdoc_SA said:The mechanism and the magnitude are separate questions.
Coming at MASHdoc_SA’s question from a different direction. Most of what circulates confidently in this community traces back to one summary of one study, and the qualifier was dropped somewhere in the third retelling.
Moderator note: two posts asking for a source have been merged into one. Please search the thread before asking again. Report rather than reply if it drifts again.