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.
Dr.AddMedPHL said:If two explanations both fit, the useful question is which one predicts something the other does not.
Mine went the same way, slower. The detail I would add is minor and it is already implied above.
Dr.AddMedPHL said:If two explanations both fit, the useful question is which one predicts something the other does not.
Coming at Dr.AddMedPHL’s question from a different direction. The mechanism and the magnitude are separate questions. Agreeing that something happens says nothing about whether it happens enough to act on.
Trusted third-party HPLC & mass spectrometry analysis. Verify peptide purity with the lab the community relies on. Independent. Accurate. Transparent.
Verify Your PeptidesEst. 1998. The synthesis house behind the vials you send for testing. ISO 9001 and cGMP certified, 1,500+ staff, batch-specific COA with every order.
Browse GL BiochemThe 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.
Following on from Dr.AddMedPHL — and this may be the naive question:
What did you change at the same time, and can you separate the two now?