Dr.SportsMedIN said:It is worth asking what the claim would look like if it were false.
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.
RegAffairsDC said:Agreed, with a caveat about community reputation: it is a lagging indicator.
Bookmarking. The distinction being drawn above is the one nobody else makes. Printing the relevant bit and taking it with me.
Dr.SportsMedIN said:It is worth asking what the claim would look like if it were false.
Worth saying that the confident version of this is more useful to the person writing it than to the person reading it.
Certified reference materials, analytical reagents, and research-grade standards for peptide verification. Trusted by laboratories worldwide.
Shop Reference StandardsOne concrete data point for the thread. 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: good thread. Keeping it here rather than moving it, because the question is general enough to be useful.