follow up the results in this channel skew because people test when they are suspicious. that is selection bias and it is real
#test-results 2025-08-23
Saturday33 messages8 participantstimes are UTC
Highlights from this day
- site_itch — has a supplier ever disputed a result posted here 20:24
- comment_fatigue — the widest spread in my data is about 2.6 percentage points across five lots from one supplier 21:03
- endotoxin_ed — post the lot, the purchase month, the lab, the number, and what you were expecting. that makes it useful later 21:12
- comment_fatigue — how do you post a result so it is actually useful to somebody in a year 21:24
Verification log updated: WWB — evidence added, status unchanged.
has a supplier ever disputed a result posted here
transit-times.csv
837 rows · not retained in the public archive
🧊2🎉8📉13
certificate said 98.6 and the independent came back 97.4, is that a problem
👍1👀3
what interests me is when the gap goes the same direction every time. once is noise, three times is a pattern
weigh the vial before you reconstitute. it costs nothing and catches the common failure
*Janoshik not the other one
whats the lot
anyone had a result they think was a lab error rather than a bad vial
update from 18 months ago: retested the same supplier, result came back better, logged both
the widest spread in my data is about 2.6 percentage points across five lots from one supplier
⚠️1🤝18😂2
weigh the vial before you reconstitute. it costs nothing and catches the common failure
post the lot, the purchase month, the lab, the number, and what you were expecting. that makes it useful later
📉1📈14
i test roughly every tenth vial. it is a sampling strategy, not paranoia
[edited]one bad test does not condemn a supplier. one good test does not clear one. both halves get ignored equally
how do you post a result so it is actually useful to somebody in a year
📉2🎉6🙏7
if the vial has been through a bad transit you are testing the transit as much as the supplier, someone check my working
how much does sample handling on my end affect the number
🎉1
anyone tested the same lot twice at different labs
i had a result i am fairly sure was a handling error on my side and i logged it as such
a point or two between the certificate and an independent result is inside what two labs disagree by
log the boring ones
🎉7👍5
assay under label with good purity means you got less of the right thing. that is a fill problem, not a synthesis problem
nice result
does a bad result on one lot condemn the whole supplier
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 / 10mgdo you test every order or sample it
my read after three years of this: purity is mostly fine across the market and fill consistency is where suppliers differ
posting my Janoshik result on lot B-0329, what do people make of it
Digest for the week of 2025-01-06 has been published.
quantity testing is usually a separate line item and it is the one worth paying for, not advice obviously
my sheet has 5 lots from KP with a spread under a point, which is tight