Adding the clinical framing, because it changes how the question reads. There is a difference between no evidence and evidence of no effect, and this subject is one where the two get swapped freely in both directions.
From the other side of the consultation, briefly. 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.
Dr.EM_Chicago said:If two explanations both fit, the useful question is which one predicts something the other does not.
Can confirm. Same sequence, different timescale. The detail I would add is minor and it is already implied above.
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.EM_Chicago said:If two explanations both fit, the useful question is which one predicts something the other does not.
Coming at Dr.EM_Chicago’s question from a different direction. Order of operations matters more than any single choice here: establish a baseline, change one thing, wait long enough for it to express itself, then measure again under the same conditions.