LeilaHI said:No disagreement, though it depends on where somebody is starting from, and this thread has been assuming a starting point nobody stated.
Adding a me-too, because a thread of one person's experience is not much use. I had assumed I was the exception until I read this.
LeilaHI said:No disagreement, though it depends on where somebody is starting from, and this thread has been assuming a starting point nobody stated.
Coming at LeilaHI’s question from a different direction. It helps to say which part of this you are uncertain about. A precise question gets a precise answer; a general one gets everybody’s favourite anecdote.
The figures, for anyone assembling their own picture. One habit that pays for itself: post the method alongside the number. A figure without its method cannot be checked, and an unchecked figure is how this community accumulates folklore.
PeptideDetective — Independent Peptide Analytics
Community-driven peptide testing and vendor rating platform. Transparent results. Unbiased analysis. Trusted by thousands.
View ResultsFollowing on from LeilaHI — and this may be the naive question:
Was that from a primary source or from a summary of one?
bri_stats said:One habit that pays for itself: post the method alongside the number.
Filing a mild objection. Mild because I might be wrong; an objection because nobody has addressed the case that does not fit. Pushing back on the anecdote-stacking. Twenty people reporting the same thing is twenty samples from the same self-selected pool, not twenty independent confirmations.