DanielChem_CHI said:For anyone reading later: the numbers in this thread are worth checking against a primary source before you act on them, including mine.
Filing a mild objection. Mild because I might be wrong; an objection because nobody has addressed the case that does not fit. I think the framing smuggles in the conclusion. Ask it the other way round and the obvious answer reverses, which usually means the question is doing the work.
DanielChem_CHI said:For anyone reading later: the numbers in this thread are worth checking against a primary source before you act on them, including mine.
Fair, and it stops being fair at the extremes. The middle of the range is well understood; the ends are where the honest answer is that nobody knows.
DanielChem_CHI 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 is exactly what I could not find anywhere else. 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 StandardsClinical perspective, offered as context rather than as advice. Most of what circulates confidently in this community traces back to one summary of one study, and the qualifier was dropped somewhere in the third retelling.
GenomicsKate said:Most of what circulates confidently in this community traces back to one summary of one study, and the qualifier was dropped somewhere in the third…
This is my experience too, for whatever a second data point is worth.