lisa_labSD said:Worth stating the units and the reference range whenever you post a number here.
This is where I part company with the consensus forming above. I think the framing smuggles in the conclusion. Ask it the other way round and the obvious answer reverses, which usually means the question is doing the work.
lisa_labSD said:Worth stating the units and the reference range whenever you post a number here.
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.
lisa_labSD said:Worth stating the units and the reference range whenever you post a number here.
Saving this. It is the first explanation that did not require me to already understand it. Printing the relevant bit and taking it with me.
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. 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.
OP back with an update, since a thread like this is useless without one.
Coming back a few months on. It held. Nothing dramatic to report, which is the report.