Dr.NutriCornell said:Whatever the answer turns out to be, the method for getting there is the same: state the assumption, do the arithmetic in public, and invite the…
Agreed, with the usual condition: that holds for the average and this board is a collection of individuals. A population claim and a personal prediction are different things and get quoted interchangeably.
CryptoCarl said:Whether it is right for the case being asked about depends on a detail that has not been given.
Genuinely useful, thank you. I had the facts and not the framework. I will report back once I have actually tried it.
Dr.NutriCornell said:Whatever the answer turns out to be, the method for getting there is the same: state the assumption, do the arithmetic in public, and invite the…
Pushing back on Dr.NutriCornell here. Pushing back on the consensus forming here. Consistency is not the same as correctness, and a board that agrees with itself quickly is usually agreeing with the first person who sounded certain.
PeptideDetective — Independent Peptide Analytics
Community-driven peptide testing and vendor rating platform. Transparent results. Unbiased analysis. Trusted by thousands.
View ResultsThe figures, for anyone assembling their own picture. Practical: whatever you change, write down the date and the reason. In three months the reason is what you will have forgotten, and the reason is what makes the record worth having.
Moderator note: the sourcing question belongs in the vendor section and has been split out. Report rather than reply if it drifts again.