reading tendon threads from 2024 and half of it aged badly
reading tendon threads from 2024 and half of it aged badly — a position I have arrived at slowly and would like tested. Regulatory classification differs between jurisdictions and has changed in several of them recently. Any answer to a status question needs a place and a date attached. Paid for identity confirmation…
Not convinced. A high purity figure with no identity confirmation tells you the sample is homogeneous, not that it is what you ordered.
Not convinced.
This is the point that should be at the top of every thread here. Identity first.
The published literature is overwhelmingly preclinical, largely in rodent models. Translating a rodent result into a human expectation is not a small step, and almost every confident claim here takes it silently.
Not convinced.
Agreed — and the preclinical to clinical gap is where nearly all the overclaiming happens.
a fifteen-residue peptide is easy to make and easy to make badly
Small fix — fifteen residues, not seventeen. The sequence is public and easy to check.
Small fix — fifteen residues, not seventeen.
mariam_mensa is right that a pure something-else is still something else.