Dr.GutHealth said:Keep the original post as written when you update it, and add the correction underneath.
Bookmarking. The distinction being drawn above is the one nobody else makes. 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. 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.
Dr.PulmRoch said:It is worth asking what the claim would look like if it were false.
This is my experience too, for whatever a second data point is worth.
PeptideDetective — Independent Peptide Analytics
Community-driven peptide testing and vendor rating platform. Transparent results. Unbiased analysis. Trusted by thousands.
View ResultsDr.PulmRoch said:It is worth asking what the claim would look like if it were false.
Adding the part of the answer the thread has not reached. 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.
Reporting back.
Closing this out. What actually changed my mind was the point about waiting for a trend instead of reading a single measurement, which is embarrassing in hindsight and worth saying anyway.