Avid Bioservices Inc (CDMO)

[co3aii]

Apologies for the late reply. Yes, it is best to look for a 95% probability that the null hypothesis has been rejected. In other words you want to be sure that that there is only a 5% or less chance that the results are random and not related to the variable studied. The higher the probability the more you can be assured that you are not dealing with chance results.

This same type of logic is applied to the coefficients of regression equations and samples when determining if they are statistically valid and what is the range you are dealing with. By going out enough standard deviations you can be assured that the you have the mean, e.g. the average height of a population is somewhere between 2 feet and 8 feet yielding not very useful information, as opposed to 5'8" plus of minus 2 inches (hypothetically speaking). The latter being more meaningful. Go out too far and you have meaningless stats though they be "certain".

I keep in mind that the sample sizes we are dealing with are too small given the population they represent to be taken as proof and so may be suspect, but better they are what they are than no difference to the good. It pays to keep in mind the old saying, "Statistics don't lie, but statisticians do."