nice result
#test-results 2025-08-24
Sunday16 messages4 participantstimes are UTC
Highlights from this day
- non_scale_win — assay under label with good purity means you got less of the right thing. that is a fill problem, not a synthesis problem 17:46
- spreadsheet_stu — unrelated but 97.4 against a certificate of 98.6 is fine. the same supplier landing low four times in a row is a question 18:19
- non_scale_win — quantity testing is usually a separate line item and it is the one worth paying for, from memory 19:15
- turnaround_tam — update on the earlier thing sample handling on your end absolutely affects it. draw cleanly, ship fast, do not let it sit warm 19:18
- turnaround_tam — i have never regretted spending the money on a test. i have regretted not testing twice, take that with a pinch of salt 19:19
how many lots do you need before you can say anything about a supplier
a result without a lot number and a purchase date is an anecdote with a pdf attached
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
which lab
⚠️1
assay under label with good purity means you got less of the right thing. that is a fill problem, not a synthesis problem
🤝2💀5
selection bias
✅7
unrelated but 97.4 against a certificate of 98.6 is fine. the same supplier landing low four times in a row is a question
attach the pdf
🙏3
i had a result i am fairly sure was a handling error on my side and i logged it as such
is it worth testing if the vial has already been through a warm transit
quantity testing is usually a separate line item and it is the one worth paying for, from memory
update on the earlier thing sample handling on your end absolutely affects it. draw cleanly, ship fast, do not let it sit warm
i have never regretted spending the money on a test. i have regretted not testing twice, take that with a pinch of salt
weigh it first