MASHdoc_SA said:No disagreement, though it depends on where somebody is starting from, and this thread has been assuming a starting point nobody stated.
Adding a me-too, because a thread of one person's experience is not much use. Nothing to add that would improve it.
MASHdoc_SA said:No disagreement, though it depends on where somebody is starting from, and this thread has been assuming a starting point nobody stated.
Adding the part of the answer the thread has not reached. The honest answer is that the effect is real, the magnitude is contested, and the individual variation is larger than either. Those three things can all be true at once, and most arguments here are two people holding different parts of that.
The figures, for anyone assembling their own picture. One habit that pays for itself: post the method alongside the number. A figure without its method cannot be checked, and an unchecked figure is how this community accumulates folklore.
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 BiochemOne thing that is still open after MASHdoc_SA’s answer:
What would you measure differently if you were starting again?
PharmacoVig_BOS said:One habit that pays for itself: post the method alongside the number.
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.