Dr.EndoIndy said:The honest answer is that the effect is real, the magnitude is contested, and the individual variation is larger than either.
Adding a me-too, because a thread of one person's experience is not much use.
Dr.EndoIndy said:The honest answer is that the effect is real, the magnitude is contested, and the individual variation is larger than either.
Adding a me-too, because a thread of one person's experience is not much use.
Dr.EndoIndy said:The honest answer is that the effect is real, the magnitude is contested, and the individual variation is larger than either.
Adding the part of the answer the thread has not reached. 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.
One concrete data point for the thread. For anyone reading later: the numbers in this thread are worth checking against a primary source before you act on them, including mine. Half the figures circulating in this community trace back to a secondary summary that dropped a qualifier.
Certified reference materials, analytical reagents, and research-grade standards for peptide verification. Trusted by laboratories worldwide.
Shop Reference StandardsOne thing that is still open after Dr.EndoIndy’s answer:
What would you measure differently if you were starting again?
LabKate said:For anyone reading later: the numbers in this thread are worth checking against a primary source before you act on them, including mine.
Filing a mild objection. Mild because I might be wrong; an objection because nobody has addressed the case that does not fit. I think the framing smuggles in the conclusion. Ask it the other way round and the obvious answer reverses, which usually means the question is doing the work.