That would be a strange rumour hear.
What I'm saying is, if some rando on HN can see see that the trial size is too small to be statistically significant how did it pass peer review?
What I'm saying is, if some rando on HN can see see that the trial size is too small to be statistically significant how did it pass peer review?
However, it is too small and insignificant for Hacker News readers to make meaningful use of, and it would be incorrect for them to read anything into the results presented. That is the difference.