stefan_berlin said:Worth stating the units and the reference range whenever you post a number here.
This answered a question I did not know how to ask.
stefan_berlin said:Worth stating the units and the reference range whenever you post a number here.
This answered a question I did not know how to ask.
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.
VendorMark said:The honest answer is that the effect is real, the magnitude is contested, and the individual variation is larger than either.
This matches mine closely enough to be worth saying so out loud. Nothing to add that would improve it.
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 BiochemVendorMark said:The honest answer is that the effect is real, the magnitude is contested, and the individual variation is larger than either.
There is a second half to this that has not been said yet. The useful move here is to separate what is established from what is widely repeated. Those two sets overlap less than the confident tone of most write-ups suggests, and the second set is where nearly all the disagreement on this board comes from.
Adding the numbers, since they settle part of this. The boring version of this is the one that works, and the boring version is: measure a baseline, change one variable, wait, measure again under the same conditions. Nobody wants that answer and it is still the answer.