Dr.AddMedPHL said:Agreed, and one caution: a single measurement is not a measurement.
This is my experience too, for whatever a second data point is worth. Posting only so the count is not one.
Dr.AddMedPHL said:Agreed, and one caution: a single measurement is not a measurement.
This is my experience too, for whatever a second data point is worth. Posting only so the count is not one.
Dr.AddMedPHL said:Agreed, and one caution: a single measurement is not a measurement.
Adding the part of the answer the thread has not reached. If two explanations both fit, the useful question is which one predicts something the other does not. That is answerable; arguing about which sounds more plausible is not.
The figures, for anyone assembling their own picture. One habit that pays for itself: post the method alongside the number. A figure without its method cannot be checked, and an unchecked figure is how this community accumulates folklore.
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 BiochemA narrower follow-up, since the general answer is now clear:
What did you change at the same time, and can you separate the two now?
labquiet_amy said:One habit that pays for itself: post the method alongside the number.
Careful with the causal language. Two things moving together in a period when five things changed is not a mechanism, and stating it as one makes the thread less useful to somebody reading it later.