why does nobody talk about method development
Been lurking in c/t2dglp1 for about 4 months and finally have something worth posting.
Short version: week 60, 2.5mg, and method development is the bit I still cannot get a straight answer on. I have read the wiki, I have read the last 37 threads, and the answers split roughly down the middle.
What I actually want to know is whether the people saying it does not matter have measured it, or whether it is just repeated confidently. Happy to be told I am overthinking this — I probably am — but I would rather overthink it now than at week 66.
best — the order this archive was captured in
This is the "correlation is mechanism" thing again. You changed three variables at once.
Retitled to remove editorialising. Put the evidence in the body.
integration decision on a shoulder changes your number by half a point on its own
area% and mass% are not the same and this whole post conflates them
chromatogram or it did not happen
This is the correct method framing. Column and gradient are load-bearing fields.
Dead space in the needle hub holds a small but non-trivial volume. On low-volume draws that can be several units.
axis labels included, always
chromatogram or it did not happen
chromatogram or it did not happen
Adding to this: integration is doing more work than the comment implies.
area% and mass% are not the same and this whole post conflates them
integration decision on a shoulder changes your number by half a point on its own
- 1Retitled to remove editorialising. Put the evidence in the body.5 comments in this branch · started by u/mass_spec_maggie
- 2chromatogram or it did not happen4 comments in this branch · started by u/phase_two_pete