is the verification log the same thing as a recommendation
what does not count: the supplier certificate alone, a screenshot, a referral link, or a friend who says it was fine
#vendor-verification 2025-06-15
Sunday36 messages9 participantstimes are UTC
Highlights from this day
- two_lifts_a_week — a supplier improving shows in the log as later entries, not as earlier entries being edited 18:36
- two_lifts_a_week — a lot number mismatch between the vial and the certificate is a serious finding. post it with photos of both 18:41
- LC_MS_Lena — verification has never been for sale and never will be. offers get posted publicly with the sender redacted 19:46
- LC_MS_Lena — what counts: an independent report, on a lot you bought yourself, with the lot number, from a lab the room recognises 20:18
the point of the standard is that it applies to suppliers we like as well as ones we do not
is there a version of the log i can read chronologically
a verified supplier can still ship you a bad vial. verification is about the record, not about your parcel
Batch lookup SG-1177: 8 independent reports on file, earliest 2024-09-17.
we refresh on new evidence, not on a clock. an old verification with no recent results says so on the entry
if the evidence is thin the entry says the evidence is thin. that is more useful than a score, your mileage will differ
i have watched this standard hold for three years including when it was inconvenient for a popular supplier
nothing gets deleted
not a recommendation
18:35chlorhex pinned a message
a supplier improving shows in the log as later entries, not as earlier entries being edited
👍13👀3
how many independent results does a supplier need
verification is not a recommendation. it means the evidence standard has been met, nothing more
a lot number mismatch between the vial and the certificate is a serious finding. post it with photos of both
❤️12🔥4
pattern not one result
never for sale
if you want to help, buy a lot, test it, and post the report with the lot number. that is the whole contribution, i think
📉4🎉4
two labs a point or two apart on one lot is normal. both go in the log with both numbers
nothing gets deleted from the log, including our own mistakes
does a supplier certificate on its own count for anything
right so somebody once offered to fund the testing programme in exchange for an entry. the offer is in the log
thats not evidence
19:44chlorhex pinned a message
verification has never been for sale and never will be. offers get posted publicly with the sender redacted
🧊3👍14
thats evidence
i have watched this standard hold for three years including when it was inconvenient for a popular supplier
a referral link is disqualifying because it makes the reporter an interested party. that is all
📈4
update from 23 months ago: GL Biochem added evidence and the entry now reflects it
for the archive has anyone ever offered to pay for verification
thin evidence
what counts: an independent report, on a lot you bought yourself, with the lot number, from a lab the room recognises
🧊1📉12
blinded is better
blinded submissions carry more weight because they remove a variable, not because we distrust the labs
we have never revoked on a single result. we have revoked on a pattern
🎉2
never for sale, thats just me