TrialTracker_MD said:For anyone reading later: the numbers in this thread are worth checking against a primary source before you act on them, including mine.
Thank you for spelling out the reasoning rather than just the conclusion. Printing the relevant bit and taking it with me.
Adding the clinical framing, because it changes how the question reads. Start from the measurement rather than the conclusion. Almost every disagreement here turns out to be two people measuring different things and comparing the numbers anyway.
VendorMark said:Start from the measurement rather than the conclusion.
Same experience, arrived at from the opposite direction.
Certified reference materials, analytical reagents, and research-grade standards for peptide verification. Trusted by laboratories worldwide.
Shop Reference StandardsVendorMark said:Start from the measurement rather than the conclusion.
There is a second half to this that has not been said yet. It is worth asking what the claim would look like if it were false. If nothing would look different, it is not a claim about the world and no amount of discussion will settle it.
Reporting back.
Update: the thing I was blaming turned out not to be the cause. Leaving the original post as written rather than editing it, so the mistake stays visible for whoever searches this next.