A narrower follow-up, since the general answer is now clear:
How would you tell the difference between that and the alternative explanation?
NicoleRaleigh said:Keep the original post as written when you update it, and add the correction underneath.
This is where I part company with the consensus forming above. I think the framing smuggles in the conclusion. Ask it the other way round and the obvious answer reverses, which usually means the question is doing the work.
NicoleRaleigh said:Keep the original post as written when you update it, and add the correction underneath.
No disagreement with NicoleRaleigh. One condition attached. Yes, and the corollary is less popular: if the reasoning holds, it also holds where it produces an answer we do not like.
Community-driven peptide testing and vendor rating platform. Transparent results. Unbiased analysis. Trusted by thousands.
View ResultsNicoleRaleigh said:Keep the original post as written when you update it, and add the correction underneath.
That reframing is the part I needed. I will report back once I have actually tried it.
Clinical perspective, offered as context rather than as advice. 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.