wendy_avl said:For anyone reading later: the numbers in this thread are worth checking against a primary source before you act on them, including mine.
Worth saying that the confident version of this is more useful to the person writing it than to the person reading it.
wendy_avl said:For anyone reading later: the numbers in this thread are worth checking against a primary source before you act on them, including mine.
Fair, and it stops being fair at the extremes. The middle of the range is well understood; the ends are where the honest answer is that nobody knows.
If somebody has the primary source to hand I would rather cite it than paraphrase it.
wendy_avl said:For anyone reading later: the numbers in this thread are worth checking against a primary source before you act on them, including mine.
This is exactly what I could not find anywhere else. Sending this to two other people who asked me the same thing last week.
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 BiochemAdding the clinical framing, because it changes how the question reads. Take it one variable at a time. Almost every unanswerable question in these threads is unanswerable because three things changed in the same fortnight, and no amount of subsequent argument can untangle them after the fact.
I would rather be corrected than agreed with, if it comes to it.
Reporting back.
Closing the loop. The answer turned out to depend on the detail I had left out of the opening post, which is a lesson about how to ask rather than about the subject.