Following on from james_edin — and this may be the naive question:
What did you change at the same time, and can you separate the two now?
dave_SLC said:For anyone reading later: the numbers in this thread are worth checking against a primary source before you act on them, including mine.
This is where I part company with the consensus forming above. Pushing back on the consensus forming here. Consistency is not the same as correctness, and a board that agrees with itself quickly is usually agreeing with the first person who sounded certain.
dave_SLC said:For anyone reading later: the numbers in this thread are worth checking against a primary source before you act on them, including mine.
That holds where the measurement is reliable. Where it is noisy — and a lot of what gets tracked here is noisy — the same reasoning produces confident nonsense.
Community-driven peptide testing and vendor rating platform. Transparent results. Unbiased analysis. Trusted by thousands.
View Resultsdave_SLC said:For anyone reading later: the numbers in this thread are worth checking against a primary source before you act on them, including mine.
This is exactly what I could not find anywhere else. Printing the relevant bit and taking it with me.
OP back with an update, since a thread like this is useless without one.
Coming back a few months on. It held. Nothing dramatic to report, which is the report.