Dr.PathRoch said:If you are going to change something, change one thing and give it long enough to express itself.
That is right, and it stops being right at the edges. The general case is well behaved; the interesting cases in this thread are all at the boundary where the general case breaks.
Dr.PathRoch said:If you are going to change something, change one thing and give it long enough to express itself.
Genuinely useful, thank you. I had the facts and not the framework. Adding it to my notes with a link back to this thread.
Adding the clinical framing, because it changes how the question reads. 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.
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 Biochemlisa_labSD said:It is worth asking what the claim would look like if it were false.
Can confirm. Same sequence, different timescale. I had assumed I was the exception until I read this.
lisa_labSD said:It is worth asking what the claim would look like if it were false.
Adding the part of the answer the thread has not reached. Worth answering the question that was asked rather than the one behind it. The narrow version usually has an answer; the broad version usually does not, and answering the broad one is how a thread stops being useful.
Correct me if the detail matters more than I have assumed.