Adding the numbers, since they settle part of this. 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.
Reporting back.
Update, and it is the boring outcome: nothing was wrong. The measurement I was reading had moved less than its own week-to-week variation, which somebody said upthread and I did not believe.
steph_laguna said:Update, and it is the boring outcome: nothing was wrong.
Filing a mild objection. Mild because I might be wrong; an objection because nobody has addressed the case that does not fit. This treats a plausible mechanism as a demonstrated one. Plausible is where you start looking, not where you stop.
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 Biochemsteph_laguna said:Update, and it is the boring outcome: nothing was wrong.
True, with the qualification that this is a self-selected group. The people for whom it did not work post less, and that shapes everything we think we know.
Found this through search years later and it is still the best discussion of the question, so adding one thing. For anyone reading later: the numbers in this thread are worth checking against a primary source before you act on them, including mine. Half the figures circulating in this community trace back to a secondary summary that dropped a qualifier.