two labs on the same lot is a luxury but it is how we learned what inter-lab variance looks like
❤️1📉6🙏1
#lab-requests 2025-09-28
Sunday19 messages6 participantstimes are UTC
Highlights from this day
- madrid_mg — declare it as an analytical reference sample with a low value. that is what it is, happy to be corrected 08:35
- madrid_mg — we have never had a lab mix up a sample. we have had members mix up their own labelling twice 08:47
- calgary_cold — how many people do we need before the split is worth it 09:19
declare it as an analytical reference sample with a low value. that is what it is, happy to be corrected
[edited]⚠️4🧊17
we have never had a lab mix up a sample. we have had members mix up their own labelling twice
👀13🧊4✅4
dont send your only vial
how do we stop the pool telling us about the pool instead of my vial
for the archive whats the current turnaround, last one took 11 days
update from 15 months ago: the blinding process is unchanged and it has held up fine
if you want to know about your vial, you have to submit your vial. that is the whole answer
we publish the raw report. summaries hide the thing you needed to see
how many people do we need before the split is worth it
👀13🔥2
do not send your only vial. that has happened twice and both times it hurt
how are we splitting the cost this time
Inter-lab diff for lot D-0718: 99.2% vs 99%. Within expected range.
are we blinding this one or does the lab know the source
powder if you can. reconstituted travels worse and adds a variable we cannot control
code not name
code compound submitted status
R-01 semaglutide 2026-02-14 reported
R-02 tirzepatide 2026-02-14 reported
R-03 retatrutide 2026-02-16 in queue
R-04 reference std 2026-02-16 reportedPurity check: no report on file for lot D-0718. Nothing logged either way.
whats the split
sorry to jump in a pooled result tells you about the pool. it does not tell you about your vial
submissions go out blinded. the lab gets a code, not a supplier name. that removes one variable, it is not distrust