PurityPaulOR said:True, with the qualification that this is a self-selected group.
Second this.
PurityPaulOR said:True, with the qualification that this is a self-selected group.
Second this.
PurityPaulOR said:True, with the qualification that this is a self-selected group.
Coming at PurityPaulOR’s question from a different direction. It is worth asking what the claim would look like if it were false. If nothing would look different, it is not a claim about the world and no amount of discussion will settle it.
One concrete data point for the thread. 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.
Certified reference materials, analytical reagents, and research-grade standards for peptide verification. Trusted by laboratories worldwide.
Shop Reference StandardsOne thing that is still open after PurityPaulOR’s answer:
Did your prescriber agree with that reading, and if not what was their objection?
DataDave said:Keep the original post as written when you update it, and add the correction underneath.
Careful with the causal language. Two things moving together in a period when five things changed is not a mechanism, and stating it as one makes the thread less useful to somebody reading it later.