Dr.PulmRoch said:Worth stating the units and the reference range whenever you post a number here.
Filing a mild objection. Mild because I might be wrong; an objection because nobody has addressed the case that does not fit. This treats a plausible mechanism as a demonstrated one. Plausible is where you start looking, not where you stop.
Dr.PulmRoch said:Worth stating the units and the reference range whenever you post a number here.
No disagreement, though it depends on where somebody is starting from, and this thread has been assuming a starting point nobody stated.
Dr.PulmRoch said:Worth stating the units and the reference range whenever you post a number here.
This answered a question I did not know how to ask. Printing the relevant bit and taking it with me.
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. 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.
If somebody has the primary source to hand I would rather cite it than paraphrase it.
Dr.ObesityLA said:If two explanations both fit, the useful question is which one predicts something the other does not.
Same pattern here, and in the same order.