This was answered several pages up and is worth repeating rather than re-litigating:
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.
One thing that is still open after pete_nash’s answer:
What would you measure differently if you were starting again?
Coming back to something from earlier in the thread, because it keeps being talked past:
If you are comparing against somebody else’s result, check that you are comparing the same measurement taken the same way. Most of the apparent contradictions in these threads dissolve at that step.
Correct me if the detail matters more than I have assumed.
PeptideDetective — Independent Peptide Analytics
Community-driven peptide testing and vendor rating platform. Transparent results. Unbiased analysis. Trusted by thousands.
View ResultsSleepDoc_PDX said:It is worth asking what the claim would look like if it were false.
That is right for the common case. Whether it is right for the case being asked about depends on a detail that has not been given.
SleepDoc_PDX said:It is worth asking what the claim would look like if it were false.
Genuinely useful, thank you. I had the facts and not the framework.