Coming back to something from earlier in the thread, because it keeps being talked past:
Agreed on the substance. I would put less weight on the timescale, because two months of anything is not enough to distinguish a trend from a wobble.
One thing that is still open after hans_munich’s answer:
How would you tell the difference between that and the alternative explanation?
Closing the loop on my own question.
Following up because I said I would. I changed one thing, left everything else alone, and waited the full interval before looking. It resolved, and I cannot prove which half of that did it.
Janoshik Analytical — Independent Testing
Trusted third-party HPLC & mass spectrometry analysis. Verify peptide purity with the lab the community relies on. Independent. Accurate. Transparent.
Verify Your PeptidesGL Biochem (Shanghai) Ltd. — Direct Manufacturer
Est. 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 BiochemDr.PathRoch said:I would put less weight on the timescale, because two months of anything is not enough to distinguish a trend from a wobble.
No disagreement, though the timescale matters more than the mechanism here. Most of what looks like a difference in kind turns out to be a difference in how long somebody waited.
Dr.PathRoch said:I would put less weight on the timescale, because two months of anything is not enough to distinguish a trend from a wobble.
This answered a question I did not know how to ask.