One concrete data point for the thread. If you are going to change something, change one thing and give it long enough to express itself. Four weeks is the usual minimum for anything pharmacological on this board, and two weeks of data has told you almost nothing.
OP back with an update, since a thread like this is useless without one.
Update — I was wrong in the opening post, specifically about the direction. Correcting it here rather than editing it away.
PedsEndoPhilly said:Update — I was wrong in the opening post, specifically about the direction.
This is where I part company with the consensus forming above. Pushing back on the consensus forming here. Consistency is not the same as correctness, and a board that agrees with itself quickly is usually agreeing with the first person who sounded certain.
Certified reference materials, analytical reagents, and research-grade standards for peptide verification. Trusted by laboratories worldwide.
Shop Reference StandardsPedsEndoPhilly said:Update — I was wrong in the opening post, specifically about the direction.
True, with the qualification that this is a self-selected group. The people for whom it did not work post less, and that shapes everything we think we know.
PedsEndoPhilly said:Update — I was wrong in the opening post, specifically about the direction.
Thank you for spelling out the reasoning rather than just the conclusion. Printing the relevant bit and taking it with me.