Adding the clinical framing, because it changes how the question reads. Worth answering the question that was asked rather than the one behind it. The narrow version usually has an answer; the broad version usually does not, and answering the broad one is how a thread stops being useful.
Dr.LipidDallas said:Worth answering the question that was asked rather than the one behind it.
I am going to disagree with the direction of travel here. The thread has converged on the tidiest answer rather than the best-supported one, and those are not the same thing.
That is the short version; the long version is somebody else's post.
Dr.LipidDallas said:Worth answering the question that was asked rather than the one behind it.
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.
I would rather be corrected than agreed with, if it comes to it.
Trusted third-party HPLC & mass spectrometry analysis. Verify peptide purity with the lab the community relies on. Independent. Accurate. Transparent.
Verify Your PeptidesEst. 1998. The synthesis house behind the vials you send for testing. ISO 9001 and cGMP certified, 1,500+ staff, batch-specific COA with every order.
Browse GL BiochemDr.LipidDallas said:Worth answering the question that was asked rather than the one behind it.
Thank you for spelling out the reasoning rather than just the conclusion. Adding it to my notes with a link back to this thread.