Inter-lab variability in peptide testing — July 2024

Dr.PulmRoch said:

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…

Same experience, arrived at from the opposite direction. I had assumed I was the exception until I read this.

Dr.PulmRoch said:

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…

There is a second half to this that has not been said yet. It helps to say which part of this you are uncertain about. A precise question gets a precise answer; a general one gets everybody’s favourite anecdote.

Correct me if the detail matters more than I have assumed.

One concrete data point for the thread. The boring version of this is the one that works, and the boring version is: measure a baseline, change one variable, wait, measure again under the same conditions. Nobody wants that answer and it is still the answer.

A narrower follow-up, since the general answer is now clear:

What would you measure differently if you were starting again?

Dr.PathRoch said:

The boring version of this is the one that works, and the boring version is: measure a baseline, change one variable, wait, measure again under the…

Worth saying that the confident version of this is more useful to the person writing it than to the person reading it.