bri_stats said:If you are going to change something, change one thing and give it long enough to express itself.
Pushing back on bri_stats here. The objection nobody has made: this only works if the measurement is doing what we assume it is doing, and that assumption has not been tested here.
bri_stats said:If you are going to change something, change one thing and give it long enough to express itself.
True, and it depends on a baseline nobody has stated. Without knowing where someone started, the same number can be an excellent result or a disappointing one.
bri_stats said:If you are going to change something, change one thing and give it long enough to express itself.
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.
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 BiochemClinical perspective, offered as context rather than as advice. It helps to ask what evidence would change your mind before you look at any. If nothing would, the discussion is not about evidence, and it is better to say so early than to spend nine posts discovering it.
Closing the loop on my own question.
Closing this out: the trough rather than the peak explains the pattern I was seeing on day six, which I had been blaming on the vial.