Adding 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.
I would rather be corrected than agreed with, if it comes to it.
TinaHashiRN 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. Posting only so the count is not one.
TinaHashiRN said:If two explanations both fit, the useful question is which one predicts something the other does not.
Coming at TinaHashiRN’s question from a different direction. It helps to say which part of this you are uncertain about. A precise question gets a precise answer; a general one gets everybody’s favourite anecdote.
Sigma-Aldrich — Research-Grade Standards
Certified reference materials, analytical reagents, and research-grade standards for peptide verification. Trusted by laboratories worldwide.
Shop Reference StandardsAdding the numbers, since they settle part of this. The boring version of this is the one that works, and the boring version is: measure a baseline, change one variable, wait, measure again under the same conditions. Nobody wants that answer and it is still the answer.