jason_paloalto said:Keep the original post as written when you update it, and add the correction underneath.
This is where I part company with the consensus forming above. I think the framing smuggles in the conclusion. Ask it the other way round and the obvious answer reverses, which usually means the question is doing the work.
Ask again with the specifics and you will get a better answer than this one.
jason_paloalto said:Keep the original post as written when you update it, and add the correction underneath.
Right, and the exception is worth naming rather than left implied, because the exception is where people get into trouble.
jason_paloalto said:Keep the original post as written when you update it, and add the correction underneath.
Genuinely useful, thank you. I had the facts and not the framework. I will report back once I have actually tried it.
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. 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.
anna.melb_AU said:It is worth asking what the claim would look like if it were false.
Second this.