PharmacoVig_BOS said:If you are comparing against somebody else’s result, check that you are comparing the same measurement taken the same way.
Thank you — that is the clearest version of this I have read, and I have read a lot of them. Taking it to my next appointment.
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.ReproEndo said:Worth answering the question that was asked rather than the one behind it.
Agreed, with the caveat that "exercise" for someone with mobility limitations is a different set of options, and the standard advice is written as though everyone can walk for an hour.
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.ReproEndo said:Worth answering the question that was asked rather than the one behind it.
Coming at Dr.ReproEndo’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.
If somebody has the primary source to hand I would rather cite it than paraphrase it.
The figures, for anyone assembling their own picture. One habit that pays for itself: post the method alongside the number. A figure without its method cannot be checked, and an unchecked figure is how this community accumulates folklore.