pat_auckland said:The honest answer is that the effect is real, the magnitude is contested, and the individual variation is larger than either.
Same pattern here, and in the same order. I had assumed I was the exception until I read this.
pat_auckland said:The honest answer is that the effect is real, the magnitude is contested, and the individual variation is larger than either.
Same pattern here, and in the same order. I had assumed I was the exception until I read this.
OP back with an update, since a thread like this is useless without one.
For the archive: it took about six weeks rather than the two I expected, and the difference between those two numbers was the whole of my problem.
The figures, for anyone assembling their own picture. If you are going to change something, change one thing and give it long enough to express itself. Four weeks is the usual minimum for anything pharmacological on this board, and two weeks of data has told you almost nothing.
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 BiochemFollowing on from pat_auckland — and this may be the naive question:
Was that from a primary source or from a summary of one?
VendorMark said:If you are going to change something, change one thing and give it long enough to express itself.
Filing a mild objection. Mild because I might be wrong; an objection because nobody has addressed the case that does not fit. Pushing back on the consensus forming here. Consistency is not the same as correctness, and a board that agrees with itself quickly is usually agreeing with the first person who sounded certain.