jason_paloalto said:Keep the original post as written when you update it, and add the correction underneath.
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.
jason_paloalto said:Keep the original post as written when you update it, and add the correction underneath.
This answered a question I did not know how to ask. Adding it to my notes with a link back to this thread.
Clinical perspective, offered as context rather than as advice. 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.
Community-driven peptide testing and vendor rating platform. Transparent results. Unbiased analysis. Trusted by thousands.
View ResultsPeptideChemSF said:It is worth asking what the claim would look like if it were false.
Same experience, arrived at from the opposite direction. Nothing to add that would improve it.
Closing the loop on my own question.
Update: approved on the third attempt after a peer-to-peer. Nothing about my case changed; only who was doing the talking.