raj_cambridge said:Say what you would expect to see if you were wrong, before you look.
Worth saying that the confident version of this is more useful to the person writing it than to the person reading it.
raj_cambridge said:Say what you would expect to see if you were wrong, before you look.
That is right, and it stops being right at the edges. The general case is well behaved; the interesting cases in this thread are all at the boundary where the general case breaks.
raj_cambridge said:Say what you would expect to see if you were wrong, before you look.
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 say which part of this you are uncertain about. A precise question gets a precise answer; a general one gets everybody’s favourite anecdote.
Worth separating that from liver and MASH, which this thread keeps folding into the same question. They behave differently and the advice does not transfer.
I would rather be corrected than agreed with, if it comes to it.
Dr.Martinez said:It helps to say which part of this you are uncertain about.
Mine went the same way, slower.