Dr.PulmRoch said:Keep the original post as written when you update it, and add the correction underneath.
This is exactly what I could not find anywhere else.
Adding the clinical framing, because it changes how the question reads. The distinction that resolves most of these threads is between what is true on average and what is true for one person. Both are real; they answer different questions and get quoted as if they were the same one.
Certified reference materials, analytical reagents, and research-grade standards for peptide verification. Trusted by laboratories worldwide.
Shop Reference StandardsLipidDoc_ATL said:The distinction that resolves most of these threads is between what is true on average and what is true for one person.
Coming at LipidDoc_ATL’s question from a different direction. It is worth asking what the claim would look like if it were false. If nothing would look different, it is not a claim about the world and no amount of discussion will settle it.
I would rather be corrected than agreed with, if it comes to it.
The figures, for anyone assembling their own picture. If you are going to change something, change one thing and give it long enough to express itself. Four weeks is the usual minimum for anything pharmacological on this board, and two weeks of data has told you almost nothing.