Adding the numbers, since they settle part of this. Worth stating the units and the reference range whenever you post a number here. A large fraction of the apparent disagreement in these threads is two people using different units and both being right.
Following on from Dr.CardioMD — and this may be the naive question:
Was that from a primary source or from a summary of one?
Dr.RaviCardio said:Worth stating the units and the reference range whenever you post a number here.
Careful with the causal language. Two things moving together in a period when five things changed is not a mechanism, and stating it as one makes the thread less useful to somebody reading it later.
That is the short version; the long version is somebody else's post.
Certified reference materials, analytical reagents, and research-grade standards for peptide verification. Trusted by laboratories worldwide.
Shop Reference StandardsDr.RaviCardio said:Worth stating the units and the reference range whenever you post a number here.
Agreed on the substance. I would put less weight on the timescale, because two months of anything is not enough to distinguish a trend from a wobble.
Dr.RaviCardio said:Worth stating the units and the reference range whenever you post a number here.
This is exactly what I could not find anywhere else. Sending this to two other people who asked me the same thing last week.