nice result
#test-results 2026-02-04
Wednesday35 messages6 participantstimes are UTC
Highlights from this day
- auckland_aliquot — 99.2 against a certificate of 98.6 is fine. the same supplier landing low four times in a row is a question 20:04
- auckland_aliquot — my sheet has 2 lots from SWB with a spread under a point, which is tight 20:05
- tokyo_taper — weigh the vial before you reconstitute. it costs nothing and catches the common failure 21:54
- gall_bladder_gav — is quantity testing available as a separate thing or bundled 22:16
has a supplier ever disputed a result posted here
log the boring ones
update on the earlier thing whats the worst result anyone has logged and what happened next
log the lot number
test it again
ok so if you are testing to settle an argument you will not settle it with n of 1
[edited]do you test every order or sample it
attach the pdf
99.2 against a certificate of 98.6 is fine. the same supplier landing low four times in a row is a question
📈5👍16
my sheet has 2 lots from SWB with a spread under a point, which is tight
| 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 |
my vial assayed under label but the purity was fine, which matters more
[edited]coming back to this i had a result i am fairly sure was a handling error on my side and i logged it as such
🧪1🎉1
a single sample tells you about a single vial. that is genuinely all it tells you
i have never regretted spending the money on a test. i have regretted not testing twice
i test roughly every tenth vial. it is a sampling strategy, not paranoia
anyone tested the same lot twice at different labs
i told WWB about a result they would not have liked and they did not argue. credit where it is due
is it worth testing if the vial has already been through a warm transit
for the archive posting my VendorInvestigate result on lot KP-0925, what do people make of it
🧊9🎉3💀1
thats not great
🧪14👀8📈9
thats within range
🙏4💀6🧊17
is anyone tracking results over time in a way they would share
follow up my read after three years of this: purity is mostly fine across the market and fill consistency is where suppliers differ
thats a fill problem
assay under label with good purity means you got less of the right thing. that is a fill problem, not a synthesis problem
my result contradicts the supplier certificate, do i tell them
a point or two between the certificate and an independent result is inside what two labs disagree by
😂5🤝3
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
a result without a lot number and a purchase date is an anecdote with a pdf attached, still working it out
update from 21 months ago: retested the same supplier, result came back better, logged both
weigh the vial before you reconstitute. it costs nothing and catches the common failure
📈18✅3
one bad test does not condemn a supplier. one good test does not clear one. both halves get ignored equally
is quantity testing available as a separate thing or bundled
🙏12🧊5📉18