lisa_labSD said:Say what you would expect to see if you were wrong, before you look.
I read this differently from lisa_labSD, on substance rather than tone. 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.
Worth separating that from renal function, which this thread keeps folding into the same question. They behave differently and the advice does not transfer.
lisa_labSD said:Say what you would expect to see if you were wrong, before you look.
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.
lisa_labSD said:Say what you would expect to see if you were wrong, before you look.
Thank you — that is the clearest version of this I have read, and I have read a lot of them. 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 BiochemFrom the other side of the consultation, briefly. There is a difference between no evidence and evidence of no effect, and this subject is one where the two get swapped freely in both directions.
Closing the loop on my own question.
Closing this out. What actually changed my mind was the point about waiting for a trend instead of reading a single measurement, which is embarrassing in hindsight and worth saying anyway.