DataDave said:Say what you would expect to see if you were wrong, before you look.
Agreed, and the size of the effect matters as much as its existence. Something real and small gets treated here as though it were real and decisive.
DataDave said:Say what you would expect to see if you were wrong, before you look.
Saving this. It is the first explanation that did not require me to already understand it. Adding it to my notes with a link back to this thread.
From the other side of the consultation, briefly. The honest answer is that the effect is real, the magnitude is contested, and the individual variation is larger than either. Those three things can all be true at once, and most arguments here are two people holding different parts of that.
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 Biochemanders_CPH said:The honest answer is that the effect is real, the magnitude is contested, and the individual variation is larger than either.
Second this. I had assumed I was the exception until I read this.
anders_CPH said:The honest answer is that the effect is real, the magnitude is contested, and the individual variation is larger than either.
Adding the part of the answer the thread has not reached. 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.