A narrower follow-up, since the general answer is now clear:
Whether normalised enzymes tell you anything about fibrosis, and what the right follow-up measurement is?
traveltech_sara said:The liver data is among the strongest non-weight findings in the class.
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.
traveltech_sara said:The liver data is among the strongest non-weight findings in the class.
No disagreement, though the timescale matters more than the mechanism here. Most of what looks like a difference in kind turns out to be a difference in how long somebody waited.
Certified reference materials, analytical reagents, and research-grade standards for peptide verification. Trusted by laboratories worldwide.
Shop Reference Standardstraveltech_sara said:The liver data is among the strongest non-weight findings in the class.
Saving this. It is the first explanation that did not require me to already understand it. Taking it to my next appointment.
Adding the clinical framing, because it changes how the question reads. 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.