Dr.SleepRoch said:It helps to ask what evidence would change your mind before you look at any.
Coming at Dr.SleepRoch’s question from a different direction. 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.
Adding the numbers, since they settle part of this. Keep the original post as written when you update it, and add the correction underneath. An edited-away mistake is invisible to the next person who makes it.
If somebody has the primary source to hand I would rather cite it than paraphrase it.
One thing that is still open after Dr.SleepRoch’s answer:
What would you measure differently if you were starting again?
Certified reference materials, analytical reagents, and research-grade standards for peptide verification. Trusted by laboratories worldwide.
Shop Reference StandardsLabKate said:Keep the original post as written when you update it, and add the correction underneath.
This is where I part company with the consensus forming above. 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.
LabKate said:Keep the original post as written when you update it, and add the correction underneath.
True, and it depends on a baseline nobody has stated. Without knowing where someone started, the same number can be an excellent result or a disappointing one.