VendorMark said:Worth stating the units and the reference range whenever you post a number here.
I read this differently from VendorMark, on substance rather than tone. The objection nobody has made: this only works if the measurement is doing what we assume it is doing, and that assumption has not been tested here.
VendorMark said:Worth stating the units and the reference range whenever you post a number here.
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.
Ask again with the specifics and you will get a better answer than this one.
Moderator note: the sourcing question belongs in the vendor section and has been split out. Thread quality here is what the rules are for. Keep it up.
Certified reference materials, analytical reagents, and research-grade standards for peptide verification. Trusted by laboratories worldwide.
Shop Reference StandardsClinical perspective, offered as context rather than as advice. Whatever the answer turns out to be, the method for getting there is the same: state the assumption, do the arithmetic in public, and invite the correction. That is slower than asserting, and it is the only version that survives being wrong.
Dr.NephBHM_UK said:Whatever the answer turns out to be, the method for getting there is the same: state the assumption, do the arithmetic in public, and invite the…
Can confirm. Same sequence, different timescale. Posting only so the count is not one.