Why we ask for units every single time, with three examples of what goes wrong posts 31–60
This is a continuation of a long topic, addressed by post number rather than by page. Start at post 1.
Picking up post #30: that is the part I would want checked first.
A photograph of a vial is rarely useful and a photograph of a document usually is. Redact the identifiers before you post either.
I have changed my mind on this once already, so take it as current rather than settled.
Collapsed as off-topic by two members at trust level 3 or above
I had written a reply contradicting post #32 and deleted it. Here is what survived.
Five questions in one post gets you one answer: the easiest one, usually not the one you needed most. Post them separately or pick the one that depends on the others least and ask that one first.
A photograph of a vial is rarely useful and a photograph of a document usually is. Redact the identifiers before you post either.
Worth separating two things that post #32 runs together.
Say what you have already ruled out. "It is not the diluent because I tried a second vial from a different box" saves three replies suggesting the diluent.
That holds under the stated conditions and I have stated them.
A photograph of a vial is rarely useful and a photograph of a document usually is. Redact the identifiers before you post either.
If your question has a deadline — a parcel in transit, a delivery you have to accept or refuse — say so. People answer differently when there is a clock on it.
Take the reasoning and check the arithmetic; I do not always get it right.
Post the arithmetic you already did. Half the questions here are answered by someone spotting which line of your working is wrong, and that is impossible if you only give the answer you got.
Quantities without units are the single commonest reason a question sits unanswered. "Two and a half" is not a dose, a volume or a concentration until you say which.
Post the arithmetic you already did. Half the questions here are answered by someone spotting which line of your working is wrong, and that is impossible if you only give the answer you got.
I read post #42 twice before replying, because I had assumed the opposite.
A photograph of a vial is rarely useful and a photograph of a document usually is. Redact the identifiers before you post either.
Speaking as somebody who asked badly last month and got a polite request for four missing details: writing the question properly the first time takes ten minutes and saves two days. Learn from me.
I would want to see it done twice before believing it once.
Nobody minds being asked to explain a term. The people who use them most are the quickest to define them, and a question that stops to ask is usually a question that gets a better answer.
A partial answer, offered because a partial answer beats none.
Post #48 is the version of this I will quote in future. One addition.
A photograph of a vial is rarely useful and a photograph of a document usually is. Redact the identifiers before you post either.
Where I part company with post #46, and it is a narrow parting.
Disagreeing with an answer you got: cite what you disagree with, say what contradicts it, and ask which one holds. Do not open with "I think you are wrong". Lead with the evidence.
Adding it because I spent an afternoon working it out and nobody should have to twice.
This settles it for me, at least until somebody posts a reason it should not.
Narrowing post #49, because the general version has more than one answer.
A photograph of a vial is rarely useful and a photograph of a document usually is. Redact the identifiers before you post either.
The strength of my opinion here exceeds the strength of my evidence.
Post the arithmetic you already did. Half the questions here are answered by someone spotting which line of your working is wrong, and that is impossible if you only give the answer you got.
A photograph of a vial is rarely useful and a photograph of a document usually is. Redact the identifiers before you post either.
I read post #53 twice before replying, because I had assumed the opposite.
When you quote a figure from somewhere else, say where from. Not as a formality — the answer frequently depends on whether the number came from a certificate, an independent report or a forum post.
If this contradicts something upthread, the upthread version may well be the better one.
Post #53 answers the question as asked. The question underneath it is different.
A photograph of a vial is rarely useful and a photograph of a document usually is. Redact the identifiers before you post either.
The part I am sure of is shorter than the part I have written.
Units. Everything needs units. This is why we ask every single time. I have seen the same arithmetic done three different ways depending on whether the person was thinking mg/mL or mg/dose or something else entirely. Stating the units makes that impossible.
What you have already read matters. Saying "I read the maintained page on this and I still have a gap" tells people they do not need to point you at the same resource you have already found. That is a genuine time saver.
Flagging that the sources on this are thinner than the confidence in the thread suggests.
Coming back to post #57, because the follow-up matters more than the original answer.
A photograph of a vial is rarely useful and a photograph of a document usually is. Redact the identifiers before you post either.
That is all I can say without guessing.
Second this, and I would have said it less carefully.