how many lots do you need before you can say anything about a supplier
#test-results 2026-05-17
Sunday36 messages9 participantstimes are UTC
Highlights from this day
- tare_weight — ok so the widest spread in my data is about 2.6 percentage points across five lots from one supplier 19:48
- tare_weight — is a purity-only test worth the money if underfill is the common failure 19:58
- assay_low_al — how do you post a result so it is actually useful to somebody in a year 21:38
which lab
a point or two between the certificate and an independent result is inside what two labs disagree by, from memory
❤️3📈7
the results in this channel skew because people test when they are suspicious. that is selection bias and it is real, still working it out
*that should say weekly
thats a fill problem
ok so the widest spread in my data is about 2.6 percentage points across five lots from one supplier
📈13⚠️3
how do you separate batch variance from supplier variance
i have never regretted spending the money on a test. i have regretted not testing twice
[edited]genuine question how much does sample handling on my end affect the number
is a purity-only test worth the money if underfill is the common failure
🔥10🤝1💀15
certificate said 99.4 and the independent came back 99.2, is that a problem
a supplier disputing a result is rare here and it has never gone well for the supplier
selection bias
does a bad result on one lot condemn the whole supplier
i had a result i am fairly sure was a handling error on my side and i logged it as such
the honest limits: hobby chain of custody is weak and any result here should be read with that in mind
do the results in this channel skew because people test when suspicious
genuine question sample handling on your end absolutely affects it. draw cleanly, ship fast, do not let it sit warm
🤝9✅1
whats the underfill rate people are actually seeing
my vial assayed under label but the purity was fine, which matters more
medutest-report-e-2205.pdf
3 pages · 571 KB · not retained in the public archive
what interests me is when the gap goes the same direction every time. once is noise, three times is a pattern
i told WWB about a result they would not have liked and they did not argue. credit where it is due
Testing queue: 7 submissions open, 16 awaiting dispatch.
my read after three years of this: purity is mostly fine across the market and fill consistency is where suppliers differ
post the lot, the purchase month, the lab, the number, and what you were expecting. that makes it useful later
how do you post a result so it is actually useful to somebody in a year
🧊4👍15😂1
sorry to jump in log the boring results too. a channel that only records failures produces a false picture
peptidemeter-summary-h-2814.pdf
2 pages · 694 KB · not retained in the public archive
sorry to jump in my result contradicts the supplier certificate, do i tell them
❤️1👀1
whats the worst result anyone has logged and what happened next
posting my VendorInvestigate result on lot B-0114, what do people make of it
i test roughly every tenth vial. it is a sampling strategy, not paranoia
assay under label with good purity means you got less of the right thing. that is a fill problem, not a synthesis problem, still working it out
coming back after 13 months with a follow up result, where do i put it
update on the earlier thing weigh the vial before you reconstitute. it costs nothing and catches the common failure, i think
janoshik-b-0114.pdf
2 pages · 305 KB · not retained in the public archive
test it again