whats the worst result anyone has logged and what happened next
#test-results 2025-02-14
Friday20 messages6 participantstimes are UTC
Highlights from this day
- pbs_pip — my read after three years of this: purity is mostly fine across the market and fill consistency is where suppliers differ 20:24
- batch_bandit — one bad test does not condemn a supplier. one good test does not clear one. both halves get ignored equally 20:27
- batch_bandit — my result contradicts the supplier certificate, do i tell them 21:00
weigh the vial before you reconstitute. it costs nothing and catches the common failure
my read after three years of this: purity is mostly fine across the market and fill consistency is where suppliers differ
| 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 |
Purity check: no report on file for lot B-0114. Nothing logged either way.
one bad test does not condemn a supplier. one good test does not clear one. both halves get ignored equally
💀18🎉14👍3
Channel stats, last 30 days: 55 messages from 55 members.
my sheet has 6 lots from BCH with a spread under a point, which is tight
thats within range
thats a fill problem
selection bias
my result contradicts the supplier certificate, do i tell them
| 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 |
whats the underfill rate people are actually seeing
the widest spread in my data is about 2.6 percentage points across five lots from one supplier
96.8 against a certificate of 98.6 is fine. the same supplier landing low four times in a row is a question
underfill is more common than impurity. if you only test purity you are testing the less likely failure
unrelated but how do you separate batch variance from supplier variance
the honest limits: hobby chain of custody is weak and any result here should be read with that in mind
update from 26 months ago: retested the same supplier, result came back better, logged both, for what its worth
right so i told QYB about a result they would not have liked and they did not argue. credit where it is due