Closing the loop on my own question.
Resolved, and the thing that resolved it was the least interesting suggestion in the thread. Writing that down for the next person who wants the interesting answer.
TrialTracker_MD said:Resolved, and the thing that resolved it was the least interesting suggestion in the thread.
Mine went the same way, slower.
TrialTracker_MD said:Resolved, and the thing that resolved it was the least interesting suggestion in the thread.
There is a second half to this that has not been said yet. 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.
Community-driven peptide testing and vendor rating platform. Transparent results. Unbiased analysis. Trusted by thousands.
View ResultsOne concrete data point for the thread. For anyone reading later: the numbers in this thread are worth checking against a primary source before you act on them, including mine. Half the figures circulating in this community trace back to a secondary summary that dropped a qualifier.
A narrower follow-up, since the general answer is now clear:
What would you measure differently if you were starting again?