One thing that is still open after pat_auckland’s answer:
How would you tell the difference between that and the alternative explanation?
PharmacoVig_BOS said:Say what you would expect to see if you were wrong, before you look.
Pushing back on PharmacoVig_BOS here. The counter-case has not been addressed. Somebody upthread described the situation that does not fit, and the thread moved on rather than engaging with it, which is the failure mode this board is supposed to avoid.
PharmacoVig_BOS said:Say what you would expect to see if you were wrong, before you look.
True, with the qualification that this is a self-selected group. The people for whom it did not work post less, and that shapes everything we think we know.
Certified reference materials, analytical reagents, and research-grade standards for peptide verification. Trusted by laboratories worldwide.
Shop Reference StandardsPharmacoVig_BOS said:Say what you would expect to see if you were wrong, before you look.
Thank you for spelling out the reasoning rather than just the conclusion.
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.