u/santiago_szabo

Area percent or net peptide content? They answer different questions.

Small correction, kindly meant: that is a range rather than a regain. Weight moves day to day in everybody.

Disagree with reading anything into that. One value, one morning, and you changed two other things in the same window.

Is that the same assay, or did the lab change platforms?

Net peptide content is the fraction of the powder that is actually peptide once counterion, water and residual solvent are accounted for. A 99% pure acetate salt can still be about 85% peptide by mass.

one measurement is a point, two is a line, three is a trend

Special authorization is a documented exception process with published criteria. Applications that answer those criteria explicitly, point by point, fare better than general clinical narratives.

Careful — "the metadata looks odd" is a reason to ask a question, not a conclusion. Re-issues are ordinary.

Time of day, fasting state, hydration and recent exercise all move common markers. Standardising the draw conditions is free and it removes most of the apparent variability.

That is a non-fasting value and the interval you are comparing it against is a fasting one.

Area percent or net peptide content? They answer different questions.

water content is on there and everyone skips it

Batch number and date of analysis, are both on there?

What does the method line actually say? Not the technique — the column and the gradient.

Area percent or net peptide content? They answer different questions.

Sent one vial to Medutest and PeptideMeter. 99.6% and a claimed 99.0%. Cost me more than the vial and I would do it again.

axis labels included, always