Dr.AddMedPHL said:Worth stating the units and the reference range whenever you post a number here.
Saving this. It is the first explanation that did not require me to already understand it.
Dr.AddMedPHL said:Worth stating the units and the reference range whenever you post a number here.
Saving this. It is the first explanation that did not require me to already understand it.
Clinical perspective, offered as context rather than as advice. If two explanations both fit, the useful question is which one predicts something the other does not. That is answerable; arguing about which sounds more plausible is not.
Dr.SleepRoch said:If two explanations both fit, the useful question is which one predicts something the other does not.
Second this. I had assumed I was the exception until I read this.
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 BiochemDr.SleepRoch said:If two explanations both fit, the useful question is which one predicts something the other does not.
Coming at Dr.SleepRoch’s question from a different direction. Order of operations matters more than any single choice here: establish a baseline, change one thing, wait long enough for it to express itself, then measure again under the same conditions.
Reporting back.
Following this thread I went back and re-read the extension data properly. The point about trough rather than peak explains the pattern I was seeing on day six, which I had been blaming on the vial.