one bad test does not condemn a supplier. one good test does not clear one. both halves get ignored equally
#test-results 2026-01-25
Sunday40 messages9 participantstimes are UTC
Highlights from this day
- still_here_2024 — a result without a lot number and a purchase date is an anecdote with a pdf attached, for what its worth 20:43
- void_volume — sample handling on your end absolutely affects it. draw cleanly, ship fast, do not let it sit warm 21:28
- adelaide_assay — sorry to jump in post the lot, the purchase month, the lab, the number, and what you were expecting. that makes it useful later 21:49
- adelaide_assay — weigh the vial before you reconstitute. it costs nothing and catches the common failure, for what its worth 21:58
- VialBot — Testing queue: 7 submissions open, 128 awaiting dispatch. 22:31
Channel stats, last 30 days: 110 messages from 22 members.
✅7🙏1
update on the earlier thing a single sample tells you about a single vial. that is genuinely all it tells you
💀7
posting my Medutest result on lot D-0718, what do people make of it
🧪7✅3
log the boring ones
i had a result i am fairly sure was a handling error on my side and i logged it as such
does a bad result on one lot condemn the whole supplier
🎉12
the widest spread in my data is about 2.6 percentage points across five lots from one supplier
quantity testing is usually a separate line item and it is the one worth paying for
a result without a lot number and a purchase date is an anecdote with a pdf attached, for what its worth
🙏1⚠️12
is quantity testing available as a separate thing or bundled
i told WXT about a result they would not have liked and they did not argue. credit where it is due
does anyone log the negative results, the boring ones
when did you buy it
slightly off topic but if you are testing to settle an argument you will not settle it with n of 1
[edited]how do you separate batch variance from supplier variance
my read after three years of this: purity is mostly fine across the market and fill consistency is where suppliers differ
is it worth testing if the vial has already been through a warm transit
do you test every order or sample it
sample handling on your end absolutely affects it. draw cleanly, ship fast, do not let it sit warm
📉15🧪5
which lab
how many lots do you need before you can say anything about a supplier
update from 6 months ago: retested the same supplier, result came back better, logged both
log the boring results too. a channel that only records failures produces a false picture
nice result
sorry to jump in post the lot, the purchase month, the lab, the number, and what you were expecting. that makes it useful later
🙏5👀5❤️8
weigh the vial before you reconstitute. it costs nothing and catches the common failure, for what its worth
🧪11✅7
is a purity-only test worth the money if underfill is the common failure
a point or two between the certificate and an independent result is inside what two labs disagree by, i could be wrong
what interests me is when the gap goes the same direction every time. once is noise, three times is a pattern
i have never regretted spending the money on a test. i have regretted not testing twice
Testing queue: 7 submissions open, 128 awaiting dispatch.
📈12
98.6 against a certificate of 99.4 is fine. the same supplier landing low four times in a row is a question
underfill is more common than impurity. if you only test purity you are testing the less likely failure
cross_border_camupdate from 6 months ago: retested the same supplier, result came back better, logged…
anyone tested the same lot twice at different labs
On this day 4 years ago this channel logged 134 messages.
a supplier disputing a result is rare here and it has never gone well for the supplier
📉3👀1
if the vial has been through a bad transit you are testing the transit as much as the supplier
transit-times.csv
309 rows · not retained in the public archive
weigh it first
one bad test does not condemn a supplier. one good test does not clear one. both halves get ignored equally