hank_denver said:If you are comparing against somebody else’s result, check that you are comparing the same measurement taken the same way.
I do not accept the framing. The question has been narrowed to the version that has a tidy answer, and the part that was dropped is the part the OP actually asked about.
hank_denver said:If you are comparing against somebody else’s result, check that you are comparing the same measurement taken the same way.
Right, and the exception is worth naming rather than left implied, because the exception is where people get into trouble.
hank_denver said:If you are comparing against somebody else’s result, check that you are comparing the same measurement taken the same way.
Thank you for spelling out the reasoning rather than just the conclusion. 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 ResultsAdding the clinical framing, because it changes how the question reads. If two explanations both fit, the useful question is which one predicts something the other does not. That is answerable; arguing about which sounds more plausible is not.
Ask again with the specifics and you will get a better answer than this one.
VanRx_Mike said:If two explanations both fit, the useful question is which one predicts something the other does not.
Same experience, arrived at from the opposite direction.