Dr.PainCLE said:The useful move here is to separate what is established from what is widely repeated.
Can confirm. Same sequence, different timescale.
bri_stats said:One habit that pays for itself: post the method alongside the number.
This is my experience too, for whatever a second data point is worth. Nothing to add that would improve it.
bri_stats said:One habit that pays for itself: post the method alongside the number.
There is a second half to this that has not been said yet. The honest answer is that the effect is real, the magnitude is contested, and the individual variation is larger than either. Those three things can all be true at once, and most arguments here are two people holding different parts of that.
Certified reference materials, analytical reagents, and research-grade standards for peptide verification. Trusted by laboratories worldwide.
Shop Reference StandardsThe figures, for anyone assembling their own picture. If you are comparing against somebody else’s result, check that you are comparing the same measurement taken the same way. Most of the apparent contradictions in these threads dissolve at that step.
Moderator note: good thread. Keeping it here rather than moving it, because the question is general enough to be useful. Carry on.