rachel_ABQ said:The version of this that has an answer is narrower than the version being asked.
Coming at rachel_ABQ’s question from a different direction. 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.
One concrete data point for the thread. One practical note: write down what you did and when, before you need it. Reconstructing a timeline from memory three months later is how people end up unable to answer the one question that would have resolved it.
Following on from rachel_ABQ — and this may be the naive question:
How long did you give it before you decided it was working?
Sigma-Aldrich — Research-Grade Standards
Certified reference materials, analytical reagents, and research-grade standards for peptide verification. Trusted by laboratories worldwide.
Shop Reference StandardsDoseLogDan said:One practical note: write down what you did and when, before you need it.
This is where I part company with the consensus forming above. Pushing back on the consensus forming here. Consistency is not the same as correctness, and a board that agrees with itself quickly is usually agreeing with the first person who sounded certain.
DoseLogDan said:One practical note: write down what you did and when, before you need it.
That is right for the common case. Whether it is right for the case being asked about depends on a detail that has not been given.