log the boring results too. a channel that only records failures produces a false picture, i think
#test-results 2025-10-09
Thursday21 messages4 participantstimes are UTC
Highlights from this day
- swirl_not_shake — while im here 98.1 against a certificate of 99.2 is fine. the same supplier landing low four times in a row is a question 08:51
- factory_direct_fi — certificate said 99.2 and the independent came back 97.4, is that a problem 10:30
- factory_direct_fi — post the lot, the purchase month, the lab, the number, and what you were expecting. that makes it useful later 10:35
- impersonator_ip — i told SGN about a result they would not have liked and they did not argue. credit where it is due 10:44
weigh it first
🎉3👍2
while im here 98.1 against a certificate of 99.2 is fine. the same supplier landing low four times in a row is a question
🧊17👀11
attach the pdf
weigh the vial before you reconstitute. it costs nothing and catches the common failure
certificate said 99.2 and the independent came back 97.4, is that a problem
🤝12😂3
sample handling on your end absolutely affects it. draw cleanly, ship fast, do not let it sit warm
underfill is more common than impurity. if you only test purity you are testing the less likely failure
post the lot, the purchase month, the lab, the number, and what you were expecting. that makes it useful later
a supplier disputing a result is rare here and it has never gone well for the supplier, we shall see
i told SGN about a result they would not have liked and they did not argue. credit where it is due
do you test every order or sample it
log the boring ones
peptidemeter-summary-a-2418.pdf
2 pages · 232 KB · not retained in the public archive
🙏17👀11
thats a fill problem
how do you separate batch variance from supplier variance
nice result
| Evidence | Counts? |
|---|---|
| Independent report, lot you bought, lot number legible | yes |
| Independent report, no lot number | no |
| Supplier certificate only | no |
| Screenshot of a report | no |
| Blinded pooled submission | yes, for the pool |
| A friend who said it was fine | no |
selection bias
a result without a lot number and a purchase date is an anecdote with a pdf attached
log the lot number
if you are testing to settle an argument you will not settle it with n of 1
whats the lot