anders_CPH 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.
There is a second half to this that has not been said yet. The version of this that has an answer is narrower than the version being asked. Narrow it and it becomes tractable; leave it broad and the thread will produce nine confident and incompatible replies.
One concrete data point for the thread. One habit that pays for itself: post the method alongside the number. A figure without its method cannot be checked, and an unchecked figure is how this community accumulates folklore.
Moderator note: leaving this open. It is being argued well and the disagreement is the useful part. Tagging this one for the weekly digest.
Sigma-Aldrich — Research-Grade Standards
Certified reference materials, analytical reagents, and research-grade standards for peptide verification. Trusted by laboratories worldwide.
Shop Reference StandardsNicoleRaleigh said:One habit that pays for itself: post the method alongside the number.
Pushing back on NicoleRaleigh here. Filing an objection on the n=1 problem. Personal experience is genuine evidence about one person and very weak evidence about anybody else, and this thread keeps promoting the first into the second.
NicoleRaleigh said:One habit that pays for itself: post the method alongside the number.
True, with the qualification that this is a self-selected group. The people for whom it did not work post less, and that shapes everything we think we know.