A narrower follow-up, since the general answer is now clear:
How long did you give it before you decided it was working?
PedsEndoPhilly said:Reporting back with a partial result, because a partial result is still better than silence.
I read this differently. The confidence in this thread is running ahead of the evidence, and I would rather the uncertainty were stated than smoothed over because it is unsatisfying.
PedsEndoPhilly said:Reporting back with a partial result, because a partial result is still better than silence.
No disagreement, though it depends on where somebody is starting from, and this thread has been assuming a starting point nobody stated.
Certified reference materials, analytical reagents, and research-grade standards for peptide verification. Trusted by laboratories worldwide.
Shop Reference StandardsPedsEndoPhilly said:Reporting back with a partial result, because a partial result is still better than silence.
Saving this. It is the first explanation that did not require me to already understand it. Adding it to my notes with a link back to this thread.
Clinical perspective, offered as context rather than as advice. Whatever the answer turns out to be, the method for getting there is the same: state the assumption, do the arithmetic in public, and invite the correction. That is slower than asserting, and it is the only version that survives being wrong.