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.
Adding a me-too, because a thread of one person's experience is not much use.
VendorMark said:Start from the measurement rather than the conclusion.
There is a second half to this that has not been said yet. The distinction that resolves most of these threads is between what is true on average and what is true for one person. Both are real; they answer different questions and get quoted as if they were the same one.
If somebody has the primary source to hand I would rather cite it than paraphrase it.
Certified reference materials, analytical reagents, and research-grade standards for peptide verification. Trusted by laboratories worldwide.
Shop Reference StandardsAdding the numbers, since they settle part of this. 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.
That is the short version; the long version is somebody else's post.
OP back with an update, since a thread like this is useless without one.
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.