greg_boulder said:If two explanations both fit, the useful question is which one predicts something the other does not.
That is correct as far as it goes, and here is where it stops going. Yes, and the corollary is less popular: if the reasoning holds, it also holds where it produces an answer we do not like.
Reporting back.
For the archive: it took about six weeks rather than the two I expected, and the difference between those two numbers was the whole of my problem.
From the other side of the consultation, briefly. 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.
Happy to go further on any of that.
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.RenalNash said:It helps to say which part of this you are uncertain about.
Second this.
Dr.RenalNash said:It helps to say which part of this you are uncertain about.
Adding the part of the answer the thread has not reached. Most of what circulates confidently in this community traces back to one summary of one study, and the qualifier was dropped somewhere in the third retelling.