MASHdoc_SA said:It helps to say which part of this you are uncertain about.
Same experience, arrived at from the opposite direction.
MASHdoc_SA said:It helps to say which part of this you are uncertain about.
Same experience, arrived at from the opposite direction.
MASHdoc_SA said:It helps to say which part of this you are uncertain about.
Coming at MASHdoc_SA’s question from a different direction. 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. The boring version of this is the one that works, and the boring version is: measure a baseline, change one variable, wait, measure again under the same conditions. Nobody wants that answer and it is still the answer.
Certified reference materials, analytical reagents, and research-grade standards for peptide verification. Trusted by laboratories worldwide.
Shop Reference StandardsFollowing on from MASHdoc_SA — and this may be the naive question:
Did your prescriber agree with that reading, and if not what was their objection?
Dr.PeteFamMed said:The boring version of this is the one that works, and the boring version is: measure a baseline, change one variable, wait, measure again under the…
This is where I part company with the consensus forming above. The counter-case has not been addressed. Somebody upthread described the situation that does not fit, and the thread moved on rather than engaging with it, which is the failure mode this board is supposed to avoid.