The figures, for anyone assembling their own picture. If you are comparing against somebody else’s result, check that you are comparing the same measurement taken the same way. Most of the apparent contradictions in these threads dissolve at that step.
If somebody has the primary source to hand I would rather cite it than paraphrase it.
Following on from PedsEndoPhilly — and this may be the naive question:
What did you change at the same time, and can you separate the two now?
NicoleRaleigh said:If you are comparing against somebody else’s result, check that you are comparing the same measurement taken the same way.
Filing a mild objection. Mild because I might be wrong; an objection because nobody has addressed the case that does not fit. The counter-case has not been addressed. Somebody upthread described the situation that does not fit, and the thread moved on rather than engaging with it, which is the failure mode this board is supposed to avoid.
I would rather be corrected than agreed with, if it comes to it.
Sigma-Aldrich — Research-Grade Standards
Certified reference materials, analytical reagents, and research-grade standards for peptide verification. Trusted by laboratories worldwide.
Shop Reference StandardsNicoleRaleigh said:If you are comparing against somebody else’s result, check that you are comparing the same measurement taken the same way.
That is correct as far as it goes, and here is where it stops going. Yes, and the corollary is less popular: if the reasoning holds, it also holds where it produces an answer we do not like.
NicoleRaleigh said:If you are comparing against somebody else’s result, check that you are comparing the same measurement taken the same way.
Genuinely useful, thank you. I had the facts and not the framework. Printing the relevant bit and taking it with me.