stefan_berlin 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 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.
If somebody has the primary source to hand I would rather cite it than paraphrase it.
stefan_berlin said:One habit that pays for itself: post the method alongside the number.
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.
stefan_berlin said:One habit that pays for itself: post the method alongside the number.
Genuinely useful, thank you. I had the facts and not the framework. Sending this to two other people who asked me the same thing last week.
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 BiochemClinical perspective, offered as context rather than as advice. The distinction that resolves most of these threads is between what is true on average and what is true for one person. Both are real; they answer different questions and get quoted as if they were the same one.
andrew_nyc said:The distinction that resolves most of these threads is between what is true on average and what is true for one person.
Adding a me-too, because a thread of one person's experience is not much use.