Following on from sean_dublin — and this may be the naive question:
What would you measure differently if you were starting again?
TirzTom said:One habit that pays for itself: post the method alongside the number.
This is where I part company with the consensus forming above. 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.
That is the short version; the long version is somebody else's post.
TirzTom said:One habit that pays for itself: post the method alongside the number.
Right, and the exception is worth naming rather than left implied, because the exception is where people get into trouble.
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 BiochemTirzTom said:One habit that pays for itself: post the method alongside the number.
This answered a question I did not know how to ask. Sending this to two other people who asked me the same thing last week.
OP back with an update, since a thread like this is useless without one.
Reporting back for the archive rather than for the thread: I did the narrow version of what was suggested, gave it the full interval, and it settled. Posting it because threads without a follow-up are half a thread.