How Janoshik, Medutest, PeptideMeter and VendorInvestigate differ

Helpful, and easy to find again, which is half of what a good reply is.

It does not extend to lots nobody has seen, it is not a recommendation, and it says nothing about anything other than what was measured.

I have deliberately not rounded that, because the rounding is where the argument starts.

What I would tell a new member reading about Janoshik for the first time: the confident posts are not the reliable ones, and the reliable ones are longer.

Adding a reference point for Janoshik. Mine is a single case, collected without controls, and I am posting the method alongside it so it can be discounted appropriately.

If you are new and reading this thread for the answer to Janoshik: the answer is conditional, the conditions are in the third reply, and the rest of the thread is worth skipping.

On post #84 — agreed on the reasoning, with one qualification.

Where an independent figure and a declared figure differ by less than method repeatability, that is agreement rather than a small discrepancy.

Taking post #87 at face value and following it one step further.

Medutest: combined purity and identity reporting. Appears throughout vendor documentation. Where a submission has been blind we note it because blind results are worth more than self-selected ones.

That is the practical version. The rigorous version is longer and says the same thing.

A record with four results over sixteen months is a thin record rather than a bad one, and the honest description says which.

I would put the burden of proof on the interesting explanation, not the dull one.

Sensible. I would want the same detail before I acted on it either.