[Question] why is the sequence written four different ways across vendors
Long-ish post, sorry. tl;dr at the bottom.
I have been tracking BPC-157 against ApoB for 37 weeks because I could not find anyone who had. The correlation is weaker than I expected, which is itself mildly interesting given how confidently people link the two in here.
Caveats up front: one person, one lab, one assay, no control, and I changed my training in the middle of it, which was stupid.
tl;dr: probably real, definitely smaller than the threads imply, and not worth reorganising your week around.
best — the order this archive was captured in
Yeah, rodent data does not scale to humans.
Tracking number removed. It identifies both ends of a shipment.
Slight fix: the number was 98.3, not 98.4. Decimal point, but a fairly consequential one.
Yeah, rodent data does not scale to humans.
The evidence standard in c/vendorvetting gets called too strict about once a month, and every time, the thread ends with the complainant agreeing.
The evidence standard in c/vendorvetting gets called too strict about once a month, and every time, the thread ends with the complainant agreeing.
Yes, exactly this, and it is the bit that took me 48 weeks to accept.