raj_cambridge said:Worth stating the units and the reference range whenever you post a number here.
Genuinely useful, thank you. I had the facts and not the framework. Taking it to my next appointment.
Adding the clinical framing, because it changes how the question reads. Worth answering the question that was asked rather than the one behind it. The narrow version usually has an answer; the broad version usually does not, and answering the broad one is how a thread stops being useful.
That is the short version; the long version is somebody else's post.
Dr.SleepRoch said:Worth answering the question that was asked rather than the one behind it.
Same pattern here, and in the same order. I had assumed I was the exception until I read this.
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 BiochemDr.SleepRoch said:Worth answering the question that was asked rather than the one behind it.
Adding the part of the answer the thread has not reached. The distinction that resolves most of these threads is between what is true on average and what is true for one person. Both are real; they answer different questions and get quoted as if they were the same one.
Ask again with the specifics and you will get a better answer than this one.
Adding the numbers, since they settle part of this. Say what you would expect to see if you were wrong, before you look. It is a small discipline and it changes what you notice.
If somebody has the primary source to hand I would rather cite it than paraphrase it.