A narrower follow-up, since the general answer is now clear:
How would you tell the difference between that and the alternative explanation?
jason_paloalto said:The version of this that has an answer is narrower than the version being asked.
Filing a mild objection. Mild because I might be wrong; an objection because nobody has addressed the case that does not fit. The counter-case has not been addressed. Somebody upthread described the situation that does not fit, and the thread moved on rather than engaging with it, which is the failure mode this board is supposed to avoid.
jason_paloalto said:The version of this that has an answer is narrower than the version being asked.
Right, and the exception is worth naming rather than left implied, because the exception is where people get into trouble.
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 Biochemjason_paloalto said:The version of this that has an answer is narrower than the version being asked.
This is exactly what I could not find anywhere else. I will report back once I have actually tried it.
Clinical perspective, offered as context rather than as advice. There is a difference between no evidence and evidence of no effect, and this subject is one where the two get swapped freely in both directions.