labquiet_amy said:For anyone reading later: the numbers in this thread are worth checking against a primary source before you act on them, including mine.
Worth saying that the confident version of this is more useful to the person writing it than to the person reading it.
labquiet_amy said:For anyone reading later: the numbers in this thread are worth checking against a primary source before you act on them, including mine.
No disagreement with labquiet_amy. One condition attached. Yes, and the corollary is less popular: if the reasoning holds, it also holds where it produces an answer we do not like.
labquiet_amy said:For anyone reading later: the numbers in this thread are worth checking against a primary source before you act on them, including mine.
This answered a question I did not know how to ask.
Certified reference materials, analytical reagents, and research-grade standards for peptide verification. Trusted by laboratories worldwide.
Shop Reference StandardsAdding the clinical framing, because it changes how the question reads. 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.
Dr.RheumBOS said:Worth answering the question that was asked rather than the one behind it.
Second this.