wendy_avl 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.
From the other side of the consultation, briefly. It helps to say which part of this you are uncertain about. A precise question gets a precise answer; a general one gets everybody’s favourite anecdote.
Ask again with the specifics and you will get a better answer than this one.
TinaHashiRN said:It helps to say which part of this you are uncertain about.
Mine went the same way, slower. I had assumed I was the exception until I read this.
Sigma-Aldrich — Research-Grade Standards
Certified reference materials, analytical reagents, and research-grade standards for peptide verification. Trusted by laboratories worldwide.
Shop Reference StandardsTinaHashiRN said:It helps to say which part of this you are uncertain about.
Coming at TinaHashiRN’s question from a different direction. 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.
Adding the numbers, since they settle part of this. The boring version of this is the one that works, and the boring version is: measure a baseline, change one variable, wait, measure again under the same conditions. Nobody wants that answer and it is still the answer.