hank_denver said:Keep the original post as written when you update it, and add the correction underneath.
That reframing is the part I needed. Adding it to my notes with a link back to this thread.
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.
Moderator note: the sourcing question belongs in the vendor section and has been split out. Carry on.
Community-driven peptide testing and vendor rating platform. Transparent results. Unbiased analysis. Trusted by thousands.
View ResultsLibrarianMeg said: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.
There is a second half to this that has not been said yet. 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.
Adding the numbers, since they settle part of this. One practical note: write down what you did and when, before you need it. Reconstructing a timeline from memory three months later is how people end up unable to answer the one question that would have resolved it.
If somebody has the primary source to hand I would rather cite it than paraphrase it.