Adding the clinical framing, because it changes how the question reads. The mechanism and the magnitude are separate questions. Agreeing that something happens says nothing about whether it happens enough to act on.
jim_asheville said:The mechanism and the magnitude are separate questions.
Mine went the same way, slower. The detail I would add is minor and it is already implied above.
jim_asheville said:The mechanism and the magnitude are separate questions.
Adding the part of the answer the thread has not reached. 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.
If somebody has the primary source to hand I would rather cite it than paraphrase it.
Certified reference materials, analytical reagents, and research-grade standards for peptide verification. Trusted by laboratories worldwide.
Shop Reference StandardsOld thread, but it comes up first when you search for this, so it is worth updating. Say what you would expect to see if you were wrong, before you look. It is a small discipline and it changes what you notice.
One thing that is still open after jim_asheville’s answer:
What would you measure differently if you were starting again?