BariatricNurseD said:It helps to say which part of this you are uncertain about.
There is a second half to this that has not been said yet. The useful move here is to separate what is established from what is widely repeated. Those two sets overlap less than the confident tone of most write-ups suggests, and the second set is where nearly all the disagreement on this board comes from.
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.
Following on from BariatricNurseD — and this may be the naive question:
What did you change at the same time, and can you separate the two now?
Sigma-Aldrich — Research-Grade Standards
Certified reference materials, analytical reagents, and research-grade standards for peptide verification. Trusted by laboratories worldwide.
Shop Reference Standardsdan_philly said:Say what you would expect to see if you were wrong, before you look.
Pushing back on dan_philly 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.
dan_philly said:Say what you would expect to see if you were wrong, before you look.
Agreed, and one caution: a single measurement is not a measurement. Anything that moves day to day needs a trend before it means anything at all.