traveltech_sara said:It helps to ask what evidence would change your mind before you look at any.
There is a second half to this that has not been said yet. Worth answering the question that was asked rather than the one behind it. The narrow version usually has an answer; the broad version usually does not, and answering the broad one is how a thread stops being useful.
The 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.
Correct me if the detail matters more than I have assumed.
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 BiochemPeptideSynthNJ said:Say what you would expect to see if you were wrong, before you look.
Pushing back on PeptideSynthNJ here. The objection nobody has made: this only works if the measurement is doing what we assume it is doing, and that assumption has not been tested here.
PeptideSynthNJ said:Say what you would expect to see if you were wrong, before you look.
PeptideSynthNJ has the substance of this right. The condition it depends on is worth stating. Yes, and the corollary is less popular: if the reasoning holds, it also holds where it produces an answer we do not like.