thats not great
#test-results 2024-11-05
Tuesday36 messages7 participantstimes are UTC
Highlights from this day
- oasis_ola — i told HJ about a result they would not have liked and they did not argue. credit where it is due, thats just me 19:02
- oasis_ola — genuine question is it worth testing if the vial has already been through a warm transit 19:08
- area_percent — 98.1 against a certificate of 99 is fine. the same supplier landing low four times in a row is a question my sheet has 9 lots from WXT with a spread under a point,… 20:24
log the boring results too. a channel that only records failures produces a false picture
is anyone tracking results over time in a way they would share
🧊8
a point or two between the certificate and an independent result is inside what two labs disagree by, thats just me
i had a result i am fairly sure was a handling error on my side and i logged it as such, ymmv
the widest spread in my data is about 2.6 percentage points across five lots from one supplier
🙏8💀2✅4
log the lot number
*Janoshik not the other one
what interests me is when the gap goes the same direction every time. once is noise, three times is a pattern
my read after three years of this: purity is mostly fine across the market and fill consistency is where suppliers differ
[edited]if you are testing to settle an argument you will not settle it with n of 1
for the archive my result contradicts the supplier certificate, do i tell them
👍14
the results in this channel skew because people test when they are suspicious. that is selection bias and it is real
post the lot, the purchase month, the lab, the number, and what you were expecting. that makes it useful later
i have never regretted spending the money on a test. i have regretted not testing twice
if the vial has been through a bad transit you are testing the transit as much as the supplier, i think
underfill is more common than impurity. if you only test purity you are testing the less likely failure
| Evidence | Counts? |
|---|---|
| Independent report, lot you bought, lot number legible | yes |
| Independent report, no lot number | no |
| Supplier certificate only | no |
| Screenshot of a report | no |
| Blinded pooled submission | yes, for the pool |
| A friend who said it was fine | no |
nice result
one bad test does not condemn a supplier. one good test does not clear one. both halves get ignored equally
coming back after 26 months with a follow up result, where do i put it
i test roughly every tenth vial. it is a sampling strategy, not paranoia
the honest limits: hobby chain of custody is weak and any result here should be read with that in mind
i have never regretted spending the money on a test. i have regretted not testing twice
posting my PeptideMeter result on lot C-4402, what do people make of it
sample handling on your end absolutely affects it. draw cleanly, ship fast, do not let it sit warm
how do you post a result so it is actually useful to somebody in a year
i told HJ about a result they would not have liked and they did not argue. credit where it is due, thats just me
[edited]chromatogram-overlay.png
1240 × 720 · 166 KB · not retained in the public archive
has a supplier ever disputed a result posted here
my sheet has 3 lots from GGPeps with a spread under a point, which is tight
the honest limits: hobby chain of custody is weak and any result here should be read with that in mind
genuine question is it worth testing if the vial has already been through a warm transit
📈7😂17
sorry to jump in a result without a lot number and a purchase date is an anecdote with a pdf attached
quantity testing is usually a separate line item and it is the one worth paying for
is quantity testing available as a separate thing or bundled
underfill is more common than impurity. if you only test purity you are testing the less likely failure
does anyone log the negative results, the boring ones
when did you buy it
98.1 against a certificate of 99 is fine. the same supplier landing low four times in a row is a question
my sheet has 9 lots from WXT with a spread under a point, which is tight
💀18