DanielChem_CHI said:Practical: whatever you change, write down the date and the reason.
Agreeing with DanielChem_CHI, and the qualification matters more than the agreement. Yes, and the corollary is less popular: if the reasoning holds, it also holds where it produces an answer we do not like.
DanielChem_CHI said:Practical: whatever you change, write down the date and the reason.
That reframing is the part I needed. Sending this to two other people who asked me the same thing last week.
Adding the clinical framing, because it changes how the question reads. Worth answering the question that was asked rather than the one behind it. The narrow version usually has an answer; the broad version usually does not, and answering the broad one is how a thread stops being useful.
Sigma-Aldrich — Research-Grade Standards
Certified reference materials, analytical reagents, and research-grade standards for peptide verification. Trusted by laboratories worldwide.
Shop Reference Standardshans_munich said:Worth answering the question that was asked rather than the one behind it.
Mine went the same way, slower. I had assumed I was the exception until I read this.
hans_munich said:Worth answering the question that was asked rather than the one behind it.
There is a second half to this that has not been said yet. 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.