a supplier improving shows in the log as later entries, not as earlier entries being edited
#vendor-verification 2026-06-03
Wednesday49 messages13 participantstimes are UTC
Highlights from this day
- VialBot — verification revoked: Qingdao Sigma Chemical · lot QS-2604-08 · Medutest 88.4% against a claimed 99.2% · two independent confirmations · status VERIFIED → REVOKED… 21:24
- blank_run — for the record: an 88 percent lot is a manufacturing and QC failure. it is not evidence of fraud and i want that on the log in those words 21:47
- blank_run — and that is what the log looks like afterwards. all four entries stay up 22:12
- protein_floor — that is why this log is worth reading 22:19
- blank_run — Homopeptide variance is the widest of anyone with this many entries. it is a consistency problem and it has been for two years 22:27
if the evidence is thin the entry says the evidence is thin. that is more useful than a score
✅11😂1
ok so two labs a point or two apart on one lot is normal. both go in the log with both numbers, for what its worth
if you want to help, buy a lot, test it, and post the report with the lot number. that is the whole contribution, your mileage will differ
✅11
refresh on evidence
what counts: an independent report, on a lot you bought yourself, with the lot number, from a lab the room recognises
do blinded submissions carry more weight than open ones
thin evidence
the log is readable chronologically and that is deliberate. the trajectory matters more than the current line, thats one data point
for the archive we refresh on new evidence, not on a clock. an old verification with no recent results says so on the entry
somebody once offered to fund the testing programme in exchange for an entry. the offer is in the log
verification revoked: Qingdao Sigma Chemical · lot QS-2604-08 · Medutest 88.4% against a claimed 99.2% · two independent confirmations · status VERIFIED → REVOKED (lot scope)
so QSC is off the list
the lot is off the list. read the bot line again, it says lot scope
we revoke at the narrowest level the evidence supports. one bad lot is not a company-wide verdict
i submitted the first result. 88.4 on purity against a sheet claiming 99.2
and i ran a second vial from the same lot at a different lab. 89.1
two labs, two vials, same lot, 0.7 apart. that is a confirmed failure and there is no arguing with it
what does QSC say
they replied in nine days, said they would investigate the lot, and asked for the report
which i sent. no response since
for the record: an 88 percent lot is a manufacturing and QC failure. it is not evidence of fraud and i want that on the log in those words
seconded. we have a #scam-watch channel and this is not a #scam-watch matter
what is the difference exactly
a bad batch is a process that went wrong. a scam is a person who never intended to ship what they sold
the QSC lot arrived, it was the right compound, the mass was in range, the purity was poor. that is a batch
and their pattern in here has always been variance and slow support, not vanishing with money
so how does the lot get un-revoked
it does not. the lot stays revoked forever, that is the historical record
the vendor gets new entries on new lots, and the log shows both. nothing gets deleted here
and that is what the log looks like afterwards. all four entries stay up
| Entry | Vendor | Lot | Claimed | Measured | Lab | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| VER-2026-0388 | Qingdao Sigma Chemical | QS-2602-11 | 99.0% | 98.6% | Janoshik | VERIFIED |
| VER-2026-0402 | Qingdao Sigma Chemical | QS-2604-08 | 99.2% | 88.4% | Medutest | REVOKED |
| VER-2026-0404 | Qingdao Sigma Chemical | QS-2604-08 | 99.2% | 89.1% | PeptideMeter | REVOKED |
| VER-2026-0419 | Qingdao Sigma Chemical | QS-2607-02 | 99.1% | 98.9% | Janoshik | VERIFIED |
oh, so the july lot already came back clean
it did. i bought it specifically to see, and i paid for the test myself
that is the honest outcome and i am not going to bury it because it is less dramatic
that is why this log is worth reading
🫡18✅9
same shape of thing happened with Homopeptide two lots in a row last winter, then it settled
Homopeptide variance is the widest of anyone with this many entries. it is a consistency problem and it has been for two years
and they have never once failed to ship, which is why they are here and not there
who is the tightest on the log
on entry count over 5, the flattest spreads are JEEP and Xi'an Mokemei. Mokemei only has six entries so treat that lightly
noted
22:40revocation policy summary pinned
how long does a verification stay current before it needs refreshing
sorry to jump in a good result with bad sample handling gets logged with a note about the handling. context is part of the record
we have never revoked on a single result. we have revoked on a pattern, we shall see
i have watched this standard hold for three years including when it was inconvenient for a popular supplier
blinded is better
😂4
verification is revoked on a confirmed failure and the revocation stays in the log permanently, thats just me