claudia_zurich said:Worth answering the question that was asked rather than the one behind it.
Adding a me-too, because a thread of one person's experience is not much use.
claudia_zurich said:Worth answering the question that was asked rather than the one behind it.
Coming at claudia_zurich’s question from a different direction. It is worth asking what the claim would look like if it were false. If nothing would look different, it is not a claim about the world and no amount of discussion will settle it.
Ask again with the specifics and you will get a better answer than this one.
Adding the numbers, since they settle part of this. Practical: whatever you change, write down the date and the reason. In three months the reason is what you will have forgotten, and the reason is what makes the record worth having.
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 BiochemA narrower follow-up, since the general answer is now clear:
How long did you give it before you decided it was working?
Reporting back.
Update — I was wrong in the opening post, specifically about the direction. Correcting it here rather than editing it away.