Adding the numbers, since they settle part of this. The boring version of this is the one that works, and the boring version is: measure a baseline, change one variable, wait, measure again under the same conditions. Nobody wants that answer and it is still the answer.
Ask again with the specifics and you will get a better answer than this one.
A narrower follow-up, since the general answer is now clear:
Did your prescriber agree with that reading, and if not what was their objection?
kate.chem said:The boring version of this is the one that works, and the boring version is: measure a baseline, change one variable, wait, measure again under the…
I am going to disagree with the direction of travel here. The thread has converged on the tidiest answer rather than the best-supported one, and those are not the same thing.
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 Biochemkate.chem said:The boring version of this is the one that works, and the boring version is: measure a baseline, change one variable, wait, measure again under the…
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.
Closing the loop on my own question.
Follow-up — I put something in the gap where food used to be rather than waiting for the gap to close on its own. That was the part nobody told me.