Hello everyone!
I'm first year PhD and yesterday for the first time I had the "pleasure" to be challenged by my collaborators, how if they were reviewers! I guess in science it's quite normal to be challenged, above all because my data are going against what's known in the literature in several points! It was my first time so I didn't say a lot and no one was really listening to me, by the way as usual I think it's always good to have some feedback and it's all part of the training.
I was wondering, if someone is challenging everything, even your results, is it a good idea to send them the original data? I'm very confident about my data (indeed I'm quite famous in my lab to be paranoid in doing plenty of replicates) but at the time of the meeting I must admit I was quite "paralyzed". Do you think it's a good alternative, instead of speaking, just sending all the data after the meeting? In my opinion it makes much more sense to let my work speaking for me.
What do you think? What's the usual procedure?
Thank you
E.

Who challenged you? And where?

I wouldn't personally unless the person challenging was a leading authority on the topic. Even then, I would rather publish it first and then send it to him/her.

What do your supervisors think?

It makes it a lot more exciting that your data challenge the accepted paradigm. I'd say this is too early to be sharing your data, although clearly there will be a stage when this is necessary.