the point of the standard is that it applies to suppliers we like as well as ones we do not, ask me again in a month
what counts: an independent report, on a lot you bought yourself, with the lot number, from a lab the room recognises
#vendor-verification 2025-10-14
Tuesday52 messages11 participantstimes are UTC
Highlights from this day
- pooled_sample — a good result with bad sample handling gets logged with a note about the handling. context is part of the record, n of 1 obviously 20:01
- sulphur_burp — sorry to jump in two labs a point or two apart on one lot is normal. both go in the log with both numbers the mods maintain the log. the room supplies the evidence… 20:25
- VialBot — Inter-lab diff for lot F-1330: 97.4% vs 99.4%. Within expected range. 21:31
- apob_over_ldl — sorry to jump in has anyone ever offered to pay for verification 22:38
- apob_over_ldl — what does not count: the supplier certificate alone, a screenshot, a referral link, or a friend who says it was fine 22:57
coming back to this a lot number mismatch between the vial and the certificate is a serious finding. post it with photos of both, i could be wrong
coming back to this coming back after 25 months, has the standard changed
*Janoshik not the other one
right so what actually counts as evidence for a verification
lot number or nothing
update from 15 months ago: QSC added evidence and the entry now reflects it
🧪8🎉1
how many independent results does a supplier need
a good result with bad sample handling gets logged with a note about the handling. context is part of the record, n of 1 obviously
🧪14👍3🤝1
does HJ being verified mean my vial is fine
log it either way
is a screenshot of a report ever acceptable
📉1💀3👀9
somebody once offered to fund the testing programme in exchange for an entry. the offer is in the log
what counts: an independent report, on a lot you bought yourself, with the lot number, from a lab the room recognises
thin evidence
sorry to jump in two labs a point or two apart on one lot is normal. both go in the log with both numbers
the mods maintain the log. the room supplies the evidence and argues about it, which is the correct division
📉14
verification is not a recommendation. it means the evidence standard has been met, nothing more
both numbers go in
[edited]thats evidence
Assay note: QSC lot C-4402 reported at 99.4% of label content.
❤️1🤝1
how long does a verification stay current before it needs refreshing
how does a supplier get verification revoked
revoked stays in the log
the mods maintain the log. the room supplies the evidence and argues about it, which is the correct division
verification has never been for sale and never will be. offers get posted publicly with the sender redacted, ill dig out the number
refresh on evidence
blinded submissions carry more weight because they remove a variable, not because we distrust the labs
the lot number on the certificate does not match my vial, what now
does a supplier certificate on its own count for anything
👍18🧪5💀17
post the photos
thats not evidence
[edited]does a good result from VendorInvestigate outweigh a bad one from PeptideMeter
is the verification log the same thing as a recommendation
Inter-lab diff for lot F-1330: 97.4% vs 99.4%. Within expected range.
🔥13👍8
follow up is there a version of the log i can read chronologically
never for sale
a referral link is disqualifying because it makes the reporter an interested party. that is all
not a recommendation
if you want to help, buy a lot, test it, and post the report with the lot number. that is the whole contribution
we have never revoked on a single result. we have revoked on a pattern
for the archive verification is revoked on a confirmed failure and the revocation stays in the log permanently
if the evidence is thin the entry says the evidence is thin. that is more useful than a score
has verification ever been reinstated after a revocation
blinded is better
sorry to jump in has anyone ever offered to pay for verification
✅2🔥7❤️12
i have a result but i did not buy the lot myself, does that count
🎉1⚠️2🙏4
we refresh on new evidence, not on a clock. an old verification with no recent results says so on the entry
*VendorInvestigate not the other one
two labs disagree on the same lot, which one goes in the log
weights-monthly.csv
852 rows · not retained in the public archive
what does not count: the supplier certificate alone, a screenshot, a referral link, or a friend who says it was fine
✅2📈17👍2
do blinded submissions carry more weight than open ones
revoked stays in the log