hank_denver said:Right, and the exception is worth naming rather than left implied, because the exception is where people get into trouble.
Can confirm. Same sequence, different timescale.
hank_denver said:Right, and the exception is worth naming rather than left implied, because the exception is where people get into trouble.
There is a second half to this that has not been said yet. Order of operations matters more than any single choice here: establish a baseline, change one thing, wait long enough for it to express itself, then measure again under the same conditions.
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.
Certified reference materials, analytical reagents, and research-grade standards for peptide verification. Trusted by laboratories worldwide.
Shop Reference StandardsA narrower follow-up, since the general answer is now clear:
How long did you give it before you decided it was working?
NicoleRaleigh said:Say what you would expect to see if you were wrong, before you look.
This is where I part company with the consensus forming above. 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.