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.
May 10, 2026 at 9:07 PM#16
50 23CryptoCarl, MariaRD, AussieAnna and 47 others
Reply Quote Save Share Report
May 11, 2026 at 3:37 AM#17
One concrete data point for the thread. 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.
1 24Dr.ObesityLA
Reply Quote Save Share Report
May 11, 2026 at 10:06 AM#18
Following on from TrialTracker_MD — and this may be the naive question:
Did your prescriber agree with that reading, and if not what was their objection?
2 0ricardo_MIA, BrianDallas92
Reply Quote Save Share Report
Sigma-Aldrich — Research-Grade Standards
Certified reference materials, analytical reagents, and research-grade standards for peptide verification. Trusted by laboratories worldwide.
Shop Reference StandardsMay 11, 2026 at 4:35 PM#19
lucas_SP_BR said:Keep the original post as written when you update it, and add the correction underneath.
Worth saying that the confident version of this is more useful to the person writing it than to the person reading it.
3 1JessicaM_2024, TomFromTexas, mike.trainer_LA
Reply Quote Save Share Report
May 11, 2026 at 11:04 PM#20
Moderator note: leaving this open. It is being argued well and the disagreement is the useful part.
Last edited: May 12, 2026 at 1:04 AM
25 23PurityPaulOR, MaxMetOK, MounjBrad and 22 others
Reply Quote Save Share Report