EndoResFellow said:It helps to say which part of this you are uncertain about.
This is my experience too, for whatever a second data point is worth. The detail I would add is minor and it is already implied above.
EndoResFellow said:It helps to say which part of this you are uncertain about.
There is a second half to this that has not been said yet. The useful move here is to separate what is established from what is widely repeated. Those two sets overlap less than the confident tone of most write-ups suggests, and the second set is where nearly all the disagreement on this board comes from.
The figures, for anyone assembling their own picture. Worth stating the units and the reference range whenever you post a number here. A large fraction of the apparent disagreement in these threads is two people using different units and both being right.
Certified reference materials, analytical reagents, and research-grade standards for peptide verification. Trusted by laboratories worldwide.
Shop Reference StandardsDanielChem_CHI said:Worth stating the units and the reference range whenever you post a number here.
Pushing back on DanielChem_CHI here. Filing an objection on the n=1 problem. Personal experience is genuine evidence about one person and very weak evidence about anybody else, and this thread keeps promoting the first into the second.