Moderator note: two posts asking for a source have been merged into one. Please search the thread before asking again. No action needed from anybody.
Admin said:For the archive: it took about six weeks rather than the two I expected, and the difference between those two numbers was the whole of my problem.
This is my experience too, for whatever a second data point is worth. The detail I would add is minor and it is already implied above.
Admin said:For the archive: it took about six weeks rather than the two I expected, and the difference between those two numbers was the whole of my problem.
Adding the part of the answer the thread has not reached. 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 ResultsOld thread, but it comes up first when you search for this, so it is worth updating. 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.
One thing that is still open after Admin’s answer:
Was that from a primary source or from a summary of one?