Clinical perspective, offered as context rather than as advice. Order of operations matters more than any single choice here: establish a baseline, change one thing, wait long enough for it to express itself, then measure again under the same conditions.
Ask again with the specifics and you will get a better answer than this one.
bri_stats said:One habit that pays for itself: post the method alongside the number.
Correct as far as it goes. The part it does not cover is what to do when the honest answer is "not enough data", which is more often than anyone likes.
bri_stats said:One habit that pays for itself: post the method alongside the number.
That reframing is the part I needed. Sending this to two other people who asked me the same thing last week.
Sigma-Aldrich — Research-Grade Standards
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. 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.
Moderator note: the sourcing question belongs in the vendor section and has been split out. No action needed from anybody.