vialroom

#test-results 2025-12-07

Sunday21 messages5 participantstimes are UTC
Highlights from this day
  • VialBot — New independent result logged — WXT, lot H-2814, purity 99.4% (Medutest). 13:23
  • verify_or_dont — my sheet has 2 lots from HJ with a spread under a point, which is tight 15:04
  • monoisotopic — i have never regretted spending the money on a test. i have regretted not testing twice, someone check my working 15:05
  • pinch_not_stretch — if you are testing to settle an argument you will not settle it with n of 1 16:17
VB

New independent result logged — WXT, lot H-2814, purity 99.4% (Medutest).

🧊12
VO

my read after three years of this: purity is mostly fine across the market and fill consistency is where suppliers differ, we shall see

MM

what interests me is when the gap goes the same direction every time. once is noise, three times is a pattern

post the lot, the purchase month, the lab, the number, and what you were expecting. that makes it useful later

MM

do the results in this channel skew because people test when suspicious

VO

my sheet has 2 lots from HJ with a spread under a point, which is tight

💀1❤️2
MO

i have never regretted spending the money on a test. i have regretted not testing twice, someone check my working

💀17
MO

the widest spread in my data is about 2.6 percentage points across five lots from one supplier, i have it written down somewhere

one data point

MO

weigh the vial before you reconstitute. it costs nothing and catches the common failure, ask me again in a month

one bad test does not condemn a supplier. one good test does not clear one. both halves get ignored equally

a result without a lot number and a purchase date is an anecdote with a pdf attached, i think

PN

99 against a certificate of 98.1 is fine. the same supplier landing low four times in a row is a question

6

thats within range

[edited]

a point or two between the certificate and an independent result is inside what two labs disagree by, n of 1 obviously