DeniseRN_TPA said:The RDA is the wrong reference and it is worth understanding why.
This answered a question I did not know how to ask. Sending this to two other people who asked me the same thing last week.
DeniseRN_TPA said:The RDA is the wrong reference and it is worth understanding why.
This answered a question I did not know how to ask. Sending this to two other people who asked me the same thing last week.
Adding the clinical framing, because it changes how the question reads. 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.
DebRD_ATL said:The version of this that has an answer is narrower than the version being asked.
Pushing back on DebRD_ATL here. I would resist the confidence. Half of what this board was certain about two years ago has since been quietly dropped, and nobody went back to correct the threads.
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 BiochemOne concrete data point for the thread. One habit that pays for itself: post the method alongside the number. A figure without its method cannot be checked, and an unchecked figure is how this community accumulates folklore.
Moderator note: a post naming a supplier has been edited. Discuss suppliers in the review sections, not here. No action needed from anybody.