This is a continuation of a long topic, addressed by post number rather than by page. Start at post 1.
Two claims get bundled together under Spreadsheets and they need separating. The descriptive one — this is what was observed — is usually well supported. The causal one — this is why — usually is not.
Almost every disagreement in threads like this one dissolves once you say which of the two you are making.
I changed my mind about Spreadsheets after someone here asked me for the source and I could not produce one. That is worth saying out loud because it is the ordinary way it happens.
Adjacent and interesting: you might post something about nutrition, bioavailability from a food perspective, or the sociology of weight. Adjacent to this community's core but not central.
Agreed, and the corollary is that a place with no visible corrections is not a place with fewer errors.
The literature is thinner on this than the confidence in the thread implies.
A request rather than an answer: could whoever has the primary source for Spreadsheets post it? I have seen the claim three times this month and each version had lost a qualifier.
Source for the Spreadsheets figure, since it was asked for. It is in the discussion rather than the abstract, which is why the version circulating is stronger than the paper is.
Reading the surrounding paragraph is worth the two minutes. The authors are more careful than their summarisers.
Adding a null result on Spreadsheets. I looked, carefully, and found nothing, and null results deserve posting precisely because they never are.
Spreadsheets has been discussed here with more heat than it deserves, mostly because two definitions have been in play the whole time.
Thank you — that answers what I came here to find out.
Industry and supply chain: post about manufacturing, pharmaceutical economics, or market dynamics if you have something substantive to contribute.
It is a small point and it changes the answer, which is an awkward combination.
I would call the community position on Spreadsheets likely rather than established, and I would be comfortable defending that hedge.
I have no financial interest in anything named in this thread and I want to say so before I comment on Spreadsheets, because it is the sort of subject where it matters.
Adding a reference point for Spreadsheets. Mine is a single case, collected without controls, and I am posting the method alongside it so it can be discounted appropriately.
Politics and public policy: healthcare policy that affects access to these compounds is relevant here. Partisan politics is not.
A methods point on Spreadsheets rather than a substantive one: if the comparison is not like for like, the difference you are measuring is the difference in method.
Two people in this thread mean different things by Spreadsheets and are disagreeing about the definition while believing they are disagreeing about the facts. Worth pausing to define it.
I would be cautious about generalising from the Spreadsheets example above. It is a good example. It is one example.
The reason Spreadsheets is hard to answer is that the obvious measurement and the relevant quantity are not the same thing, and substituting one for the other is silent.
Lounge question, no agenda: does anyone else keep a physical notebook for this rather than a file? Mine is more use than anything I have typed, and I cannot entirely explain why.
Filing a mild objection to the consensus on Spreadsheets. Mild because I might be wrong; an objection because nobody has addressed the case that does not fit.
A digression that keeps occurring to me: the most-linked documents here are the dullest ones. Nothing gets cited like the unit-arithmetic page.
I would not lead a decision with this, but I would not ignore it either.
No disagreement from me. Posting only so the question does not look ignored.
What I would check first on Spreadsheets is whether the thing being measured moved or whether the way of measuring it moved. Those look identical in a graph.