PeptideChemSF said:The version of this that has an answer is narrower than the version being asked.
That holds where the measurement is reliable. Where it is noisy — and a lot of what gets tracked here is noisy — the same reasoning produces confident nonsense.
claudia_zurich said:Agreed, and one caution: a single measurement is not a measurement.
Thank you for spelling out the reasoning rather than just the conclusion. Adding it to my notes with a link back to this thread.
PeptideChemSF said:The version of this that has an answer is narrower than the version being asked.
This is where I part company with the consensus forming above. Not convinced. The evidence being cited is consistent with the conclusion and also consistent with two other conclusions nobody has ruled out.
Certified reference materials, analytical reagents, and research-grade standards for peptide verification. Trusted by laboratories worldwide.
Shop Reference StandardsOne concrete data point for the thread. Give anything pharmacological four weeks before you judge it, and give anything measured weekly a four-point rolling average before you call it a trend.