This gets cited here weekly, usually second-hand, so it is worth setting out what it does and does not establish.
The trade-off is reversibility against privacy and there is no option that gives you both. Card payments are reversible and disclose the most; crypto discloses least and is irreversible, which is precisely why pressure toward it is a warning sign when it comes from a seller rather than a buyer. Escrow only means anything where the escrow agent is independent of both parties, which is rarely the case in practice.
Where I think it is weakest: the follow-up is short relative to how long people actually take these drugs, so durability is an assumption here rather than a finding.
What I actually want to know is how people are thinking about the trade-off between reversibility and privacy, because you cannot have both. Tell me what I have not thought of.
Figures above are from the primary publication rather than the press summary. If a number here disagrees with one you have, post yours and we will work out which of us is reading a secondary source.
bri_stats said:The trade-off is reversibility against privacy and there is no option that gives you both.
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.
bri_stats said:The trade-off is reversibility against privacy and there is no option that gives you both.
This is where I part company with the consensus forming above. The counter-case has not been addressed. Somebody upthread described the situation that does not fit, and the thread moved on rather than engaging with it, which is the failure mode this board is supposed to avoid.
PeptideDetective — Independent Peptide Analytics
Community-driven peptide testing and vendor rating platform. Transparent results. Unbiased analysis. Trusted by thousands.
View ResultsTaking the question as asked, rather than the general version of it. 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.
MikeFit_NJ said:Agreed, with the usual condition: that holds for the average and this board is a collection of individuals.
Can confirm. Same sequence, different timescale.