rachel_ABQ said:Whether it is right for the case being asked about depends on a detail that has not been given.
Can confirm. Same sequence, different timescale. Nothing to add that would improve it.
rachel_ABQ said:Whether it is right for the case being asked about depends on a detail that has not been given.
Adding the part of the answer the thread has not reached. Start from the measurement rather than the conclusion. Almost every disagreement here turns out to be two people measuring different things and comparing the numbers anyway.
One concrete data point for the thread. Say what you would expect to see if you were wrong, before you look. It is a small discipline and it changes what you notice.
Community-driven peptide testing and vendor rating platform. Transparent results. Unbiased analysis. Trusted by thousands.
View ResultsA narrower follow-up, since the general answer is now clear:
What did you change at the same time, and can you separate the two now?
TirzTom said:Say what you would expect to see if you were wrong, before you look.
I read this differently. The confidence in this thread is running ahead of the evidence, and I would rather the uncertainty were stated than smoothed over because it is unsatisfying.