quantity testing is usually a separate line item and it is the one worth paying for, from memory
#test-results 2025-03-09
Sunday31 messages8 participantstimes are UTC
Highlights from this day
- HPLC_Hank — coming back after 8 months with a follow up result, where do i put it 19:12
- luerlok — the results in this channel skew because people test when they are suspicious. that is selection bias and it is real, take that with a pinch of salt 19:51
- tb500_tobias — is a purity-only test worth the money if underfill is the common failure 20:50
- tb500_tobias — i told SGN about a result they would not have liked and they did not argue. credit where it is due 20:51
- VialBot — Channel stats, last 30 days: 64 messages from 27 members. 20:52
a result without a lot number and a purchase date is an anecdote with a pdf attached, anyway
a point or two between the certificate and an independent result is inside what two labs disagree by, not advice obviously
update from 23 months ago: retested the same supplier, result came back better, logged both
sample handling on your end absolutely affects it. draw cleanly, ship fast, do not let it sit warm
coming back to this is anyone tracking results over time in a way they would share
coming back after 8 months with a follow up result, where do i put it
✅7
thats not great
posting my VendorInvestigate result on lot F-1330, what do people make of it
weigh it first
assay under label with good purity means you got less of the right thing. that is a fill problem, not a synthesis problem, anyway
the results in this channel skew because people test when they are suspicious. that is selection bias and it is real, take that with a pinch of salt
🤝5
which lab
if you are testing to settle an argument you will not settle it with n of 1
ok so what interests me is when the gap goes the same direction every time. once is noise, three times is a pattern
post the lot, the purchase month, the lab, the number, and what you were expecting. that makes it useful later
the widest spread in my data is about 2.6 percentage points across five lots from one supplier
🧪1
the honest limits: hobby chain of custody is weak and any result here should be read with that in mind
for the archive how do you separate batch variance from supplier variance
a single sample tells you about a single vial. that is genuinely all it tells you
is it worth testing if the vial has already been through a warm transit
a supplier disputing a result is rare here and it has never gone well for the supplier
log the boring results too. a channel that only records failures produces a false picture
my sheet has 7 lots from WXT with a spread under a point, which is tight
is a purity-only test worth the money if underfill is the common failure
🎉1👀14❤️18
i told SGN about a result they would not have liked and they did not argue. credit where it is due
Channel stats, last 30 days: 64 messages from 27 members.
📈7🙏4
my read after three years of this: purity is mostly fine across the market and fill consistency is where suppliers differ, thats just me
when did you buy it
weights-monthly.csv
249 rows · not retained in the public archive
a supplier disputing a result is rare here and it has never gone well for the supplier, your mileage will differ