TirzTom said:That is right, and it stops being right at the edges.
Can confirm. Same sequence, different timescale.
TirzTom said:That is right, and it stops being right at the edges.
There is a second half to this that has not been said yet. 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.
Adding the numbers, since they settle part of this. If you are comparing against somebody else’s result, check that you are comparing the same measurement taken the same way. Most of the apparent contradictions in these threads dissolve at that step.
Community-driven peptide testing and vendor rating platform. Transparent results. Unbiased analysis. Trusted by thousands.
View ResultsFollowing on from TirzTom — and this may be the naive question:
Was that from a primary source or from a summary of one?
Dr.AddMedPHL said:If you are comparing against somebody else’s result, check that you are comparing the same measurement taken the same way.
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.