Dr.EndoEP said:If two explanations both fit, the useful question is which one predicts something the other does not.
Right, and the exception is worth naming rather than left implied, because the exception is where people get into trouble.
Dr.EndoEP said:If two explanations both fit, the useful question is which one predicts something the other does not.
Right, and the exception is worth naming rather than left implied, because the exception is where people get into trouble.
JessicaH_TX said:Liver enzyme update related to liver and MASH: I had mildly elevated ALT/AST at baseline (likely NAFLD).
Bookmarking. The distinction being drawn above is the one nobody else makes. I will report back once I have actually tried it.
Dr.EndoEP said:If two explanations both fit, the useful question is which one predicts something the other does not.
This is where I part company with the consensus forming above. The counter-case has not been addressed. Somebody upthread described the situation that does not fit, and the thread moved on rather than engaging with it, which is the failure mode this board is supposed to avoid.
Certified reference materials, analytical reagents, and research-grade standards for peptide verification. Trusted by laboratories worldwide.
Shop Reference StandardsAdding the numbers, since they settle part of this. For anyone reading later: the numbers in this thread are worth checking against a primary source before you act on them, including mine. Half the figures circulating in this community trace back to a secondary summary that dropped a qualifier.
Moderator note: a post naming a supplier has been edited. Discuss suppliers in the review sections, not here. Thread quality here is what the rules are for. Keep it up.