Following on from jim_asheville — and this may be the naive question:
Was that from a primary source or from a summary of one?
MikeFit_NJ said:Resolved, and the thing that resolved it was the least interesting suggestion in the thread.
I read this differently from MikeFit_NJ, on substance rather than tone. This treats a plausible mechanism as a demonstrated one. Plausible is where you start looking, not where you stop.
MikeFit_NJ said:Resolved, and the thing that resolved it was the least interesting suggestion in the thread.
Agreed on the substance. I would put less weight on the timescale, because two months of anything is not enough to distinguish a trend from a wobble.
That is the short version; the long version is somebody else's post.
Community-driven peptide testing and vendor rating platform. Transparent results. Unbiased analysis. Trusted by thousands.
View ResultsMikeFit_NJ said:Resolved, and the thing that resolved it was the least interesting suggestion in the thread.
Bookmarking. The distinction being drawn above is the one nobody else makes. Taking it to my next appointment.
From the other side of the consultation, briefly. It helps to ask what evidence would change your mind before you look at any. If nothing would, the discussion is not about evidence, and it is better to say so early than to spend nine posts discovering it.
Correct me if the detail matters more than I have assumed.