a single sample tells you about a single vial. that is genuinely all it tells you, for what its worth
#test-results 2026-02-23
Monday47 messages11 participantstimes are UTC
Highlights from this day
- VialBot — Verification log updated: QSC — evidence added, status unchanged. 19:33
- low_and_slow — right so post the lot, the purchase month, the lab, the number, and what you were expecting. that makes it useful later 19:36
- tb500_tobias — assay under label with good purity means you got less of the right thing. that is a fill problem, not a synthesis problem, thats one data point 20:26
- blind_submit — the honest limits: hobby chain of custody is weak and any result here should be read with that in mind 21:37
- auckland_aliquot — has a supplier ever disputed a result posted here 22:27
while im here quantity testing is usually a separate line item and it is the one worth paying for
one bad test does not condemn a supplier. one good test does not clear one. both halves get ignored equally
Verification log updated: QSC — evidence added, status unchanged.
right so post the lot, the purchase month, the lab, the number, and what you were expecting. that makes it useful later
lot bought purity assay/label
A-2418 2025-03 99.1% 9.6 / 10mg
A-2601 2025-08 98.7% 9.8 / 10mg
B-0114 2026-01 99.3% 9.4 / 10mg
B-0329 2026-04 98.9% 9.9 / 10mga supplier disputing a result is rare here and it has never gone well for the supplier
98.6 against a certificate of 99.4 is fine. the same supplier landing low four times in a row is a question
🧪3
whats the worst result anyone has logged and what happened next
my read after three years of this: purity is mostly fine across the market and fill consistency is where suppliers differ
weights-monthly.csv
310 rows · not retained in the public archive
log the boring results too. a channel that only records failures produces a false picture, happy to be corrected
if the vial has been through a bad transit you are testing the transit as much as the supplier
how do you post a result so it is actually useful to somebody in a year
underfill is more common than impurity. if you only test purity you are testing the less likely failure
is it worth testing if the vial has already been through a warm transit
ok so the widest spread in my data is about 2.6 percentage points across five lots from one supplier
log the boring ones
which lab
👀6
assay under label with good purity means you got less of the right thing. that is a fill problem, not a synthesis problem, thats one data point
✅3👀1🧊7
whats the lot
anyone had a result they think was a lab error rather than a bad vial
ok so i test roughly every tenth vial. it is a sampling strategy, not paranoia, i think
when did you buy it
one data point
if you are testing to settle an argument you will not settle it with n of 1
weigh it first
log the lot number
i have never regretted spending the money on a test. i have regretted not testing twice
do the results in this channel skew because people test when suspicious
does anyone log the negative results, the boring ones
unrelated but sample handling on your end absolutely affects it. draw cleanly, ship fast, do not let it sit warm
the honest limits: hobby chain of custody is weak and any result here should be read with that in mind
🧊1😂12
the results in this channel skew because people test when they are suspicious. that is selection bias and it is real
a result without a lot number and a purchase date is an anecdote with a pdf attached
i told QST about a result they would not have liked and they did not argue. credit where it is due
a point or two between the certificate and an independent result is inside what two labs disagree by
for the archive is anyone tracking results over time in a way they would share
unrelated but how do you separate batch variance from supplier variance
thats a fill problem
has a supplier ever disputed a result posted here
🧊11⚠️1🧪5
i had a result i am fairly sure was a handling error on my side and i logged it as such
selection bias
attach the pdf
🎉1👀7
thats within range
attach the pdf
🤝6🔥1
certificate said 96.8 and the independent came back 99.4, is that a problem