lisa_labSD said:If you are comparing against somebody else’s result, check that you are comparing the same measurement taken the same way.
This is where I part company with the consensus forming above. 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.
If somebody has the primary source to hand I would rather cite it than paraphrase it.
lisa_labSD said:If you are comparing against somebody else’s result, check that you are comparing the same measurement taken the same way.
Agreed, with the usual condition: that holds for the average and this board is a collection of individuals. A population claim and a personal prediction are different things and get quoted interchangeably.
I would rather be corrected than agreed with, if it comes to it.
lisa_labSD said:If you are comparing against somebody else’s result, check that you are comparing the same measurement taken the same way.
Bookmarking. The distinction being drawn above is the one nobody else makes. Taking it to my next appointment.
PeptideDetective — Independent Peptide Analytics
Community-driven peptide testing and vendor rating platform. Transparent results. Unbiased analysis. Trusted by thousands.
View ResultsFrom the other side of the consultation, briefly. Order of operations matters more than any single choice here: establish a baseline, change one thing, wait long enough for it to express itself, then measure again under the same conditions.
jim_asheville said:Order of operations matters more than any single choice here: establish a baseline, change one thing, wait long enough for it to express itself, then…
Second this.