A narrower follow-up, since the general answer is now clear:
What would you measure differently if you were starting again?
SandraNC_45 said:It is worth asking what the claim would look like if it were false.
I read this differently from SandraNC_45, on substance rather than tone. I would resist the confidence. Half of what this board was certain about two years ago has since been quietly dropped, and nobody went back to correct the threads.
SandraNC_45 said:It is worth asking what the claim would look like if it were false.
Agreed, and the size of the effect matters as much as its existence. Something real and small gets treated here as though it were real and decisive.
Ask again with the specifics and you will get a better answer than this one.
Certified reference materials, analytical reagents, and research-grade standards for peptide verification. Trusted by laboratories worldwide.
Shop Reference StandardsSandraNC_45 said:It is worth asking what the claim would look like if it were false.
Saving this. It is the first explanation that did not require me to already understand it. I will report back once I have actually tried it.
From the other side of the consultation, briefly. Start from the measurement rather than the conclusion. Almost every disagreement here turns out to be two people measuring different things and comparing the numbers anyway.