From the other side of the consultation, briefly. It helps to say which part of this you are uncertain about. A precise question gets a precise answer; a general one gets everybody’s favourite anecdote.
BiostatsBrad said:Keep the original post as written when you update it, and add the correction underneath.
Agreed on the substance. I would put less weight on the timescale, because two months of anything is not enough to distinguish a trend from a wobble.
That is the short version; the long version is somebody else's post.
BiostatsBrad said:Keep the original post as written when you update it, and add the correction underneath.
Genuinely useful, thank you. I had the facts and not the framework. Taking it to my next appointment.
Certified reference materials, analytical reagents, and research-grade standards for peptide verification. Trusted by laboratories worldwide.
Shop Reference StandardsFrom the other side of the consultation, briefly. 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.
Moderator note: good thread. Keeping it here rather than moving it, because the question is general enough to be useful. No action needed from anybody.