sarah_TO said:The version of this that has an answer is narrower than the version being asked.
This matches mine closely enough to be worth saying so out loud. Posting only so the count is not one.
sarah_TO said:The version of this that has an answer is narrower than the version being asked.
Coming at sarah_TO’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.
Adding the numbers, since they settle part of this. 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.
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 BiochemFollowing on from sarah_TO — and this may be the naive question:
How long did you give it before you decided it was working?
dan_philly said:Keep the original post as written when you update it, and add the correction underneath.
This is where I part company with the consensus forming above. This treats a plausible mechanism as a demonstrated one. Plausible is where you start looking, not where you stop.