PharmacoVig_BOS said:Worth stating the units and the reference range whenever you post a number here.
Bookmarking. The distinction being drawn above is the one nobody else makes.
Adding the clinical framing, because it changes how the question reads. Worth answering the question that was asked rather than the one behind it. The narrow version usually has an answer; the broad version usually does not, and answering the broad one is how a thread stops being useful.
Dr.ReproEndo said:Worth answering the question that was asked rather than the one behind it.
Mine went the same way, slower. Nothing to add that would improve it.
Certified reference materials, analytical reagents, and research-grade standards for peptide verification. Trusted by laboratories worldwide.
Shop Reference StandardsDr.ReproEndo said:Worth answering the question that was asked rather than the one behind it.
There is a second half to this that has not been said yet. 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.
OP back with an update, since a thread like this is useless without one.
Coming back a few months on. It held. Nothing dramatic to report, which is the report.