anders_CPH said:Worth stating the units and the reference range whenever you post a number here.
Filing a mild objection. Mild because I might be wrong; an objection because nobody has addressed the case that does not fit. Not convinced. The evidence being cited is consistent with the conclusion and also consistent with two other conclusions nobody has ruled out.
anders_CPH said:Worth stating the units and the reference range whenever you post a number here.
No disagreement, though it depends on where somebody is starting from, and this thread has been assuming a starting point nobody stated.
anders_CPH said:Worth stating the units and the reference range whenever you post a number here.
Thank you — that is the clearest version of this I have read, and I have read a lot of them.
Certified reference materials, analytical reagents, and research-grade standards for peptide verification. Trusted by laboratories worldwide.
Shop Reference StandardsFrom the other side of the consultation, briefly. 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.
MASHdoc_SA said: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…
This matches mine closely enough to be worth saying so out loud. I had assumed I was the exception until I read this.