On this day 7 years ago this channel logged 140 messages.
#test-results 2026-06-18
Thursday44 messages11 participantstimes are UTC
Highlights from this day
- abdo_two_inch — for the archive if the vial has been through a bad transit you are testing the transit as much as the supplier 21:59
- tyne_tracks — my sheet has 8 lots from BCH with a spread under a point, which is tight 22:18
- abdo_two_inch — 96.8 against a certificate of 99 is fine. the same supplier landing low four times in a row is a question 23:26
weigh it first
🙏2
log the boring ones
which lab
📈1
quantity testing is usually a separate line item and it is the one worth paying for
a point or two between the certificate and an independent result is inside what two labs disagree by
slightly off topic but certificate said 99.2 and the independent came back 98.1, is that a problem
is quantity testing available as a separate thing or bundled
whats the worst result anyone has logged and what happened next
🎉3🧪17💀2
assay under label with good purity means you got less of the right thing. that is a fill problem, not a synthesis problem
🎉3⚠️1
follow up update from 24 months ago: retested the same supplier, result came back better, logged both
selection bias
i have never regretted spending the money on a test. i have regretted not testing twice
when did you buy it
how do you separate batch variance from supplier variance
thats not great
log the lot number
coming back after 26 months with a follow up result, where do i put it
my read after three years of this: purity is mostly fine across the market and fill consistency is where suppliers differ
how many lots do you need before you can say anything about a supplier
a supplier disputing a result is rare here and it has never gone well for the supplier
for the archive posting my PeptideMeter result on lot A-2601, what do people make of it
weigh the vial before you reconstitute. it costs nothing and catches the common failure
one bad test does not condemn a supplier. one good test does not clear one. both halves get ignored equally
whats the lot
test it again
medutest-report-g-0641.pdf
3 pages · 355 KB · not retained in the public archive
👀1
for the archive if the vial has been through a bad transit you are testing the transit as much as the supplier
🧪10🔥11
sample handling on your end absolutely affects it. draw cleanly, ship fast, do not let it sit warm
the results in this channel skew because people test when they are suspicious. that is selection bias and it is real
the widest spread in my data is about 2.6 percentage points across five lots from one supplier
thats a fill problem
if you are testing to settle an argument you will not settle it with n of 1
my sheet has 8 lots from BCH with a spread under a point, which is tight
📉1👀15
attach the pdf
a result without a lot number and a purchase date is an anecdote with a pdf attached
post the lot, the purchase month, the lab, the number, and what you were expecting. that makes it useful later
❤️1⚠️2
i test roughly every tenth vial. it is a sampling strategy, not paranoia
one data point
anyone tested the same lot twice at different labs
96.8 against a certificate of 99 is fine. the same supplier landing low four times in a row is a question
📉13✅13😂18
does a bad result on one lot condemn the whole supplier
🎉9🙏4
how do you post a result so it is actually useful to somebody in a year