One concrete data point for the thread. Worth stating the units and the reference range whenever you post a number here. A large fraction of the apparent disagreement in these threads is two people using different units and both being right.
Following on from claudia_zurich — and this may be the naive question:
Did your prescriber agree with that reading, and if not what was their objection?
PeptideSynthNJ said:Worth stating the units and the reference range whenever you post a number here.
Coming at PeptideSynthNJ’s question from a different direction. It helps to say which part of this you are uncertain about. A precise question gets a precise answer; a general one gets everybody’s favourite anecdote.
If somebody has the primary source to hand I would rather cite it than paraphrase it.
Trusted third-party HPLC & mass spectrometry analysis. Verify peptide purity with the lab the community relies on. Independent. Accurate. Transparent.
Verify Your PeptidesEst. 1998. The synthesis house behind the vials you send for testing. ISO 9001 and cGMP certified, 1,500+ staff, batch-specific COA with every order.
Browse GL BiochemClosing the loop on my own question.
Closing this out. What actually changed my mind was the point about waiting for a trend instead of reading a single measurement, which is embarrassing in hindsight and worth saying anyway.
carl_compliance said:It helps to say which part of this you are uncertain about.
Right, and the exception is worth naming rather than left implied, because the exception is where people get into trouble.