TrialTracker_MD said:Keep the original post as written when you update it, and add the correction underneath.
Filing a mild objection. Mild because I might be wrong; an objection because nobody has addressed the case that does not fit. I would resist the confidence. Half of what this board was certain about two years ago has since been quietly dropped, and nobody went back to correct the threads.
TrialTracker_MD said:Keep the original post as written when you update it, and add the correction underneath.
That is right for the common case. Whether it is right for the case being asked about depends on a detail that has not been given.
TrialTracker_MD 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. 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 ResultsAdding 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.CardioMD said:It is worth asking what the claim would look like if it were false.
Same pattern here, and in the same order.