andrew_nyc 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.
Adding the part of the answer the thread has not reached. Order of operations matters more than any single choice here: establish a baseline, change one thing, wait long enough for it to express itself, then measure again under the same conditions.
Correct me if the detail matters more than I have assumed.
One concrete data point for the thread. Keep the original post as written when you update it, and add the correction underneath. An edited-away mistake is invisible to the next person who makes it.
Sigma-Aldrich — Research-Grade Standards
Certified reference materials, analytical reagents, and research-grade standards for peptide verification. Trusted by laboratories worldwide.
Shop Reference Standardsdave_SLC said:Keep the original post as written when you update it, and add the correction underneath.
Careful with the causal language. Two things moving together in a period when five things changed is not a mechanism, and stating it as one makes the thread less useful to somebody reading it later.
dave_SLC said:Keep the original post as written when you update it, and add the correction underneath.
Agreeing with dave_SLC, 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.