Asked to pay by a method with no recourse, by a supplier I had used twice before without being asked, which is what made me stop.
What I am after is how people are thinking about the trade-off between reversibility and privacy, because you cannot have both.
Happy to be told the question itself is wrong.
This one has a reasonably settled answer, so here it is. 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.
HPLC_Greg 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.
No disagreement, though it depends on where somebody is starting from, and this thread has been assuming a starting point nobody stated.
Community-driven peptide testing and vendor rating platform. Transparent results. Unbiased analysis. Trusted by thousands.
View ResultsPeptideSynthNJ said:Asked to pay by a method with no recourse, by a supplier I had used twice before without being asked, which is what made me stop.
This matches mine closely enough to be worth saying so out loud. I had assumed I was the exception until I read this.
From the other side of the consultation, briefly. 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.