raj_cambridge said:If you are comparing against somebody else’s result, check that you are comparing the same measurement taken the same way.
I read this differently from raj_cambridge, on substance rather than tone. 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.
raj_cambridge said:If you are comparing against somebody else’s result, check that you are comparing the same measurement taken the same way.
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.
raj_cambridge said:If you are comparing against somebody else’s result, check that you are comparing the same measurement taken the same way.
Bookmarking. The distinction being drawn above is the one nobody else makes. Adding it to my notes with a link back to this thread.
PeptideDetective — Independent Peptide Analytics
Community-driven peptide testing and vendor rating platform. Transparent results. Unbiased analysis. Trusted by thousands.
View ResultsClinical perspective, offered as context rather than as advice. Start from the measurement rather than the conclusion. Almost every disagreement here turns out to be two people measuring different things and comparing the numbers anyway.
anders_CPH said:Start from the measurement rather than the conclusion.
Can confirm. Same sequence, different timescale.