Clinical perspective, offered as context rather than as advice. 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 correction. That is slower than asserting, and it is the only version that survives being wrong.
FDA_TrackerJim said:Keep the original post as written when you update it, and add the correction underneath.
This answered a question I did not know how to ask. Adding it to my notes with a link back to this thread.
From the other side of the consultation, briefly. It helps to ask what evidence would change your mind before you look at any. If nothing would, the discussion is not about evidence, and it is better to say so early than to spend nine posts discovering it.
PeptideDetective — Independent Peptide Analytics
Community-driven peptide testing and vendor rating platform. Transparent results. Unbiased analysis. Trusted by thousands.
View ResultsLibrarianMeg said:It helps to ask what evidence would change your mind before you look at any.
Can confirm. Same sequence, different timescale. I had assumed I was the exception until I read this.