revoked stays in the log
#vendor-verification 2025-08-16
- retention_time — what counts: an independent report, on a lot you bought yourself, with the lot number, from a lab the room recognises a lot number mismatch between the vial and the… 10:31
- retention_time — a lot number mismatch between the vial and the certificate is a serious finding. post it with photos of both, thats one data point 10:34
- knees_first — is there a version of the log i can read chronologically 12:25
what counts: an independent report, on a lot you bought yourself, with the lot number, from a lab the room recognises
a lot number mismatch between the vial and the certificate is a serious finding. post it with photos of both
a lot number mismatch between the vial and the certificate is a serious finding. post it with photos of both, thats one data point
[edited]is the verification log the same thing as a recommendation
for the archive what does not count: the supplier certificate alone, a screenshot, a referral link, or a friend who says it was fine
verification has never been for sale and never will be. offers get posted publicly with the sender redacted, happy to be corrected
verification is not a recommendation. it means the evidence standard has been met, nothing more
the point of the standard is that it applies to suppliers we like as well as ones we do not
i have watched this standard hold for three years including when it was inconvenient for a popular supplier, i could be wrong
thats evidence
thin evidence
post the photos
Recon calculator: 10mg in 1ml = 5mg/ml.
two labs disagree on the same lot, which one goes in the log
pattern not one result
thats not evidence
both numbers go in
what actually counts as evidence for a verification
we have never revoked on a single result. we have revoked on a pattern
the log is readable chronologically and that is deliberate. the trajectory matters more than the current line
[edited]is there a version of the log i can read chronologically