A narrower follow-up, since the general answer is now clear:
How would you tell the difference between that and the alternative explanation?
TomFromTexas said:Follow-up — getting the denial reason in writing was the step that mattered.
Filing a mild objection. Mild because I might be wrong; an objection because nobody has addressed the case that does not fit. The counter-case has not been addressed. Somebody upthread described the situation that does not fit, and the thread moved on rather than engaging with it, which is the failure mode this board is supposed to avoid.
TomFromTexas said:Follow-up — getting the denial reason in writing was the step that mattered.
No disagreement, though the timescale matters more than the mechanism here. Most of what looks like a difference in kind turns out to be a difference in how long somebody waited.
Certified reference materials, analytical reagents, and research-grade standards for peptide verification. Trusted by laboratories worldwide.
Shop Reference StandardsTomFromTexas said:Follow-up — getting the denial reason in writing was the step that mattered.
This is exactly what I could not find anywhere else. Taking it to my next appointment.
Clinical perspective, offered as context rather than as advice. The version of this that has an answer is narrower than the version being asked. Narrow it and it becomes tractable; leave it broad and the thread will produce nine confident and incompatible replies.