NicoleRaleigh said:Keep the original post as written when you update it, and add the correction underneath.
Worth saying that the confident version of this is more useful to the person writing it than to the person reading it.
NicoleRaleigh said:Keep the original post as written when you update it, and add the correction underneath.
No disagreement, though it depends on where somebody is starting from, and this thread has been assuming a starting point nobody stated.
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. 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.
Correct me if the detail matters more than I have assumed.
PharmHunterJen said:If two explanations both fit, the useful question is which one predicts something the other does not.
This is my experience too, for whatever a second data point is worth. Nothing to add that would improve it.