SleepDoc_PDX said:That is right, and it stops being right at the edges.
Coming at SleepDoc_PDX’s question from a different direction. The useful move here is to separate what is established from what is widely repeated. Those two sets overlap less than the confident tone of most write-ups suggests, and the second set is where nearly all the disagreement on this board comes from.
If somebody has the primary source to hand I would rather cite it than paraphrase it.
One concrete data point for the thread. If you are comparing against somebody else’s result, check that you are comparing the same measurement taken the same way. Most of the apparent contradictions in these threads dissolve at that step.
I would rather be corrected than agreed with, if it comes to it.
Sigma-Aldrich — Research-Grade Standards
Certified reference materials, analytical reagents, and research-grade standards for peptide verification. Trusted by laboratories worldwide.
Shop Reference StandardsFollowing on from SleepDoc_PDX — and this may be the naive question:
Did your prescriber agree with that reading, and if not what was their objection?
anders_CPH said:If you are comparing against somebody else’s result, check that you are comparing the same measurement taken the same way.
I read this differently from anders_CPH, on substance rather than tone. Not convinced. The evidence being cited is consistent with the conclusion and also consistent with two other conclusions nobody has ruled out.