> it feels unscientific to always quibble over experiment design after the results show no effect. Respectfully, this is exactly what science is. The process o

> it feels unscientific to always quibble over experiment design after the results show no effect. Respectfully, this is exactly what science is. The process of finding potential confounding variables and controlling for them in a new study is critical. The OP isn’t saying the original study is wrong, or falsified, or whatever, just that it might not account for a particular effect. Someone should study that effect! There is a lot of untestable post-hoc armchair experiment criticism from the supplement crowd, but this isn’t an example of that!