DebRD_ATL said:It is worth asking what the claim would look like if it were false.
Second this. I had assumed I was the exception until I read this.
DebRD_ATL said:It is worth asking what the claim would look like if it were false.
Second this. I had assumed I was the exception until I read this.
DanielChem_CHI said:One habit that pays for itself: post the method alongside the number.
Filing a mild objection. Mild because I might be wrong; an objection because nobody has addressed the case that does not fit. I would resist the confidence. Half of what this board was certain about two years ago has since been quietly dropped, and nobody went back to correct the threads.
Worth separating that from the lipid panel, which this thread keeps folding into the same question. They behave differently and the advice does not transfer.
If somebody has the primary source to hand I would rather cite it than paraphrase it.
DanielChem_CHI said:One habit that pays for itself: post the method alongside the number.
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.
Community-driven peptide testing and vendor rating platform. Transparent results. Unbiased analysis. Trusted by thousands.
View ResultsDanielChem_CHI said:One habit that pays for itself: post the method alongside the number.
This is exactly what I could not find anywhere else. Printing the relevant bit and taking it with me.