one bad test does not condemn a supplier. one good test does not clear one. both halves get ignored equally
#test-results 2025-09-25
Thursday40 messages9 participantstimes are UTC
Highlights from this day
- kev_measures — if the vial has been through a bad transit you are testing the transit as much as the supplier 21:12
- kev_measures — sorry to jump in log the boring results too. a channel that only records failures produces a false picture, i could be wrong 21:18
- kev_measures — whats the underfill rate people are actually seeing if the vial has been through a bad transit you are testing the transit as much as the supplier 21:30
- salt_bridge — my sheet has 6 lots from MKM with a spread under a point, which is tight, from memory 21:40
- VialBot — Reminder for vat_on_import: dose day is today. Set 6 days ago. 23:27
has a supplier ever disputed a result posted here
whats the lot
if the vial has been through a bad transit you are testing the transit as much as the supplier
🤝2👀7⚠️1
coming back to this i have never regretted spending the money on a test. i have regretted not testing twice
sorry to jump in log the boring results too. a channel that only records failures produces a false picture, i could be wrong
📉1👍17⚠️1
post the lot, the purchase month, the lab, the number, and what you were expecting. that makes it useful later
the results in this channel skew because people test when they are suspicious. that is selection bias and it is real
*PeptideMeter not the other one
whats the underfill rate people are actually seeing
if the vial has been through a bad transit you are testing the transit as much as the supplier
✅4📉1
how many lots do you need before you can say anything about a supplier
nice result
quantity testing is usually a separate line item and it is the one worth paying for
my sheet has 6 lots from MKM with a spread under a point, which is tight, from memory
🎉1📉6
coming back after 2 months with a follow up result, where do i put it
🧊1
if you are testing to settle an argument you will not settle it with n of 1, ask me again in a month
what interests me is when the gap goes the same direction every time. once is noise, three times is a pattern
my result contradicts the supplier certificate, do i tell them
is quantity testing available as a separate thing or bundled
the honest limits: hobby chain of custody is weak and any result here should be read with that in mind
is a purity-only test worth the money if underfill is the common failure
do you test every order or sample it
log the boring ones
📈1
a result without a lot number and a purchase date is an anecdote with a pdf attached, i could be wrong
slightly off topic but my vial assayed under label but the purity was fine, which matters more
my read after three years of this: purity is mostly fine across the market and fill consistency is where suppliers differ
the widest spread in my data is about 2.6 percentage points across five lots from one supplier
test it again
anyone had a result they think was a lab error rather than a bad vial
i test roughly every tenth vial. it is a sampling strategy, not paranoia, i could be wrong
a point or two between the certificate and an independent result is inside what two labs disagree by
underfill is more common than impurity. if you only test purity you are testing the less likely failure
update from 21 months ago: retested the same supplier, result came back better, logged both
quick one sample handling on your end absolutely affects it. draw cleanly, ship fast, do not let it sit warm
how do you separate batch variance from supplier variance
unrelated but a single sample tells you about a single vial. that is genuinely all it tells you
thats a fill problem
thats within range
Reminder for vat_on_import: dose day is today. Set 6 days ago.