bri_stats said:If you are going to change something, change one thing and give it long enough to express itself.
Agreed on the substance. I would put less weight on the timescale, because two months of anything is not enough to distinguish a trend from a wobble.
Correct me if the detail matters more than I have assumed.
bri_stats said:If you are going to change something, change one thing and give it long enough to express itself.
Genuinely useful, thank you. I had the facts and not the framework. Adding it to my notes with a link back to this thread.
Adding the clinical framing, because it changes how the question reads. If two explanations both fit, the useful question is which one predicts something the other does not. That is answerable; arguing about which sounds more plausible is not.
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 BiochemMASHdoc_SA said:If two explanations both fit, the useful question is which one predicts something the other does not.
Adding a me-too, because a thread of one person's experience is not much use. The detail I would add is minor and it is already implied above.
Closing the loop on my own question.
Follow-up — getting the denial reason in writing was the step that mattered. It named the criterion, and the criterion was a document I already had.