Adding the numbers, since they settle part of this. For anyone reading later: the numbers in this thread are worth checking against a primary source before you act on them, including mine. Half the figures circulating in this community trace back to a secondary summary that dropped a qualifier.
If somebody has the primary source to hand I would rather cite it than paraphrase it.
Following on from anders_CPH — and this may be the naive question:
How would you tell the difference between that and the alternative explanation?
SleepDoc_PDX said:For anyone reading later: the numbers in this thread are worth checking against a primary source before you act on them, including mine.
Pushing back on SleepDoc_PDX here. Not convinced. The evidence being cited is consistent with the conclusion and also consistent with two other conclusions nobody has ruled out.
Sigma-Aldrich — Research-Grade Standards
Certified reference materials, analytical reagents, and research-grade standards for peptide verification. Trusted by laboratories worldwide.
Shop Reference StandardsSleepDoc_PDX said:For anyone reading later: the numbers in this thread are worth checking against a primary source before you act on them, including mine.
Correct, and worth adding that it is reversible. Nothing being described here is a one-way door, which changes how cautious it is reasonable to be.
SleepDoc_PDX said:For anyone reading later: the numbers in this thread are worth checking against a primary source before you act on them, including mine.
This is exactly what I could not find anywhere else. Taking it to my next appointment.