u/Pleasant-Pain8629

I’ve noticed a pattern on forums, this one included: when mouse studies report negative findings about a compound(s) people are excited about, they’re dismissed as “just mouse data” and therefore irrelevant. But when those same kind of studies (mouse) show positive results about the same compound(s), no one seems to question their validity.

This is intellectually inconsistent. If a well-designed mouse study is valid enough to support a claim when the results are positive, it should carry similar weight when the findings are negative—even if they’re disappointing. Otherwise, the standard isn’t scientific, it’s selective.