Adding the clinical framing, because it changes how the question reads. Whatever the answer turns out to be, the method for getting there is the same: state the assumption, do the arithmetic in public, and invite the correction. That is slower than asserting, and it is the only version that survives being wrong.
VendorMark said:If you are comparing against somebody else’s result, check that you are comparing the same measurement taken the same way.
Fair, and it stops being fair at the extremes. The middle of the range is well understood; the ends are where the honest answer is that nobody knows.
Correct me if the detail matters more than I have assumed.
VendorMark said:If you are comparing against somebody else’s result, check that you are comparing the same measurement taken the same way.
This answered a question I did not know how to ask. I will report back once I have actually tried 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 BiochemClinical perspective, offered as context rather than as advice. 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.
Moderator note: a post naming a supplier has been edited. Discuss suppliers in the review sections, not here. Carry on.