Following on from Dr.NephBHM_UK — and this may be the naive question:
How long did you give it before you decided it was working?
pat_auckland said:Keep the original post as written when you update it, and add the correction underneath.
I read this differently from pat_auckland, on substance rather than tone. Pushing back on the consensus forming here. Consistency is not the same as correctness, and a board that agrees with itself quickly is usually agreeing with the first person who sounded certain.
pat_auckland said:Keep the original post as written when you update it, and add the correction underneath.
Agreed, with the usual condition: that holds for the average and this board is a collection of individuals. A population claim and a personal prediction are different things and get quoted interchangeably.
Certified reference materials, analytical reagents, and research-grade standards for peptide verification. Trusted by laboratories worldwide.
Shop Reference Standardspat_auckland said:Keep the original post as written when you update it, and add the correction underneath.
That reframing is the part I needed.
Clinical perspective, offered as context rather than as advice. Take it one variable at a time. Almost every unanswerable question in these threads is unanswerable because three things changed in the same fortnight, and no amount of subsequent argument can untangle them after the fact.