Dr.EM_Chicago said:The liver data is among the strongest non-weight findings in the class.
This answered a question I did not know how to ask. Adding it to my notes with a link back to this thread.
Dr.EM_Chicago said:The liver data is among the strongest non-weight findings in the class.
This answered a question I did not know how to ask. Adding it to my notes with a link back to this thread.
Clinical perspective, offered as context rather than as advice. The version of this that has an answer is narrower than the version being asked. Narrow it and it becomes tractable; leave it broad and the thread will produce nine confident and incompatible replies.
Dr.Martinez said:It is worth asking what the claim would look like if it were false.
Filing a mild objection. Mild because I might be wrong; an objection because nobody has addressed the case that does not fit. 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.
Worth separating that from liver and MASH, which this thread keeps folding into the same question. They behave differently and the advice does not transfer.
Certified reference materials, analytical reagents, and research-grade standards for peptide verification. Trusted by laboratories worldwide.
Shop Reference StandardsAdding the numbers, since they settle part of this. Keep the original post as written when you update it, and add the correction underneath. An edited-away mistake is invisible to the next person who makes it.
That is the short version; the long version is somebody else's post.