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:If you are comparing against somebody else’s result, check that you are comparing the same measurement taken the same way.
Pushing back on jason_paloalto here. Pushing back on the consensus forming here. Consistency is not the same as correctness, and a board that agrees with itself quickly is usually agreeing with the first person who sounded certain.
jason_paloalto said:If you are comparing against somebody else’s result, check that you are comparing the same measurement taken the same way.
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.
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:If you are comparing against somebody else’s result, check that you are comparing the same measurement taken the same way.
Saving this. It is the first explanation that did not require me to already understand it. Sending this to two other people who asked me the same thing last week.
Closing the loop on my own question.
Update — my curve sits below the published mean and the explanation is that the trial arm had support I do not have. That was reassuring rather than otherwise.