thats a fill problem
[edited]#test-results 2025-08-14
Thursday13 messages4 participantstimes are UTC
Highlights from this day
- egfr_ed — if the vial has been through a bad transit you are testing the transit as much as the supplier 18:44
- HPLC_Hank — 99.2 against a certificate of 99.4 is fine. the same supplier landing low four times in a row is a question 19:07
- HPLC_Hank — assay under label with good purity means you got less of the right thing. that is a fill problem, not a synthesis problem 19:54
if the vial has been through a bad transit you are testing the transit as much as the supplier
👀2✅15🔥1
coming back to this what interests me is when the gap goes the same direction every time. once is noise, three times is a pattern
i told TFC about a result they would not have liked and they did not argue. credit where it is due
posting my PeptideMeter result on lot C-4402, what do people make of it
🤝3😂2
a result without a lot number and a purchase date is an anecdote with a pdf attached
[edited]99.2 against a certificate of 99.4 is fine. the same supplier landing low four times in a row is a question
⚠️9
one bad test does not condemn a supplier. one good test does not clear one. both halves get ignored equally
anyone tested the same lot twice at different labs
my sheet has 2 lots from TFC with a spread under a point, which is tight
one data point
nice result
assay under label with good purity means you got less of the right thing. that is a fill problem, not a synthesis problem
lot bought purity assay/label
A-2418 2025-03 99.1% 9.6 / 10mg
A-2601 2025-08 98.7% 9.8 / 10mg
B-0114 2026-01 99.3% 9.4 / 10mg
B-0329 2026-04 98.9% 9.9 / 10mg🔥9🧊2🧪16