From the other side of the consultation, briefly. The version of this that has an answer is narrower than the version being asked. Narrow it and it becomes tractable; leave it broad and the thread will produce nine confident and incompatible replies.
Happy to go further on any of that.
james_edin said:The version of this that has an answer is narrower than the version being asked.
Second this. Posting only so the count is not one.
james_edin said:The version of this that has an answer is narrower than the version being asked.
There is a second half to this that has not been said yet. 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.
If somebody has the primary source to hand I would rather cite it than paraphrase it.
Sigma-Aldrich — Research-Grade Standards
Certified reference materials, analytical reagents, and research-grade standards for peptide verification. Trusted by laboratories worldwide.
Shop Reference StandardsThe figures, for anyone assembling their own picture. Say what you would expect to see if you were wrong, before you look. It is a small discipline and it changes what you notice.
A narrower follow-up, since the general answer is now clear:
Did your prescriber agree with that reading, and if not what was their objection?