sarah.morrison said:The part it does not cover is what to do when the honest answer is "not enough data", which is more often than anyone likes.
Same pattern here, and in the same order.
sarah.morrison said:The part it does not cover is what to do when the honest answer is "not enough data", which is more often than anyone likes.
Same pattern here, and in the same order.
sarah.morrison said:The part it does not cover is what to do when the honest answer is "not enough data", which is more often than anyone likes.
Adding the part of the answer the thread has not reached. The useful move here is to separate what is established from what is widely repeated. Those two sets overlap less than the confident tone of most write-ups suggests, and the second set is where nearly all the disagreement on this board comes from.
One concrete data point for the thread. The boring version of this is the one that works, and the boring version is: measure a baseline, change one variable, wait, measure again under the same conditions. Nobody wants that answer and it is still the answer.
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 BiochemA narrower follow-up, since the general answer is now clear:
Did your prescriber agree with that reading, and if not what was their objection?
Dr.AddMedPHL said:The boring version of this is the one that works, and the boring version is: measure a baseline, change one variable, wait, measure again under the…
This is where I part company with the consensus forming above. The objection nobody has made: this only works if the measurement is doing what we assume it is doing, and that assumption has not been tested here.
Correct me if the detail matters more than I have assumed.