which lab
#test-results 2026-01-07
Wednesday37 messages6 participantstimes are UTC
Highlights from this day
- gip_glp_gil — coming back after 7 months with a follow up result, where do i put it 16:52
- gip_glp_gil — post the lot, the purchase month, the lab, the number, and what you were expecting. that makes it useful later 17:38
- gip_glp_gil — my sheet has 9 lots from SSA with a spread under a point, which is tight 19:38
update from 7 months ago: retested the same supplier, result came back better, logged both
😂5👀10
coming back after 7 months with a follow up result, where do i put it
peptidemeter-summary-d-0718.pdf
2 pages · 156 KB · not retained in the public archive
🤝15👀6
when did you buy it
anyone had a result they think was a lab error rather than a bad vial
is a purity-only test worth the money if underfill is the common 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 |
assay under label with good purity means you got less of the right thing. that is a fill problem, not a synthesis problem
i told JEEP about a result they would not have liked and they did not argue. credit where it is due
post the lot, the purchase month, the lab, the number, and what you were expecting. that makes it useful later
😂8📉17🙏9
weigh the vial before you reconstitute. it costs nothing and catches the common failure
is anyone tracking results over time in a way they would share
certificate said 97.4 and the independent came back 98.6, is that a problem
a supplier disputing a result is rare here and it has never gone well for the supplier, anyway
thats within range
for the archive how many lots do you need before you can say anything about a supplier
my read after three years of this: purity is mostly fine across the market and fill consistency is where suppliers differ
anyone tested the same lot twice at different labs
[edited]is quantity testing available as a separate thing or bundled
lot bought purity assay/label
A-2418 2025-03 99.1% 9.6 / 10mg
A-2601 2025-08 98.7% 9.8 / 10mg
B-0114 2026-01 99.3% 9.4 / 10mg
B-0329 2026-04 98.9% 9.9 / 10mg99.4 against a certificate of 98.6 is fine. the same supplier landing low four times in a row is a question
a single sample tells you about a single vial. that is genuinely all it tells you
a result without a lot number and a purchase date is an anecdote with a pdf attached
do you test every order or sample it
sorry to jump in how do you separate batch variance from supplier variance
whats the worst result anyone has logged and what happened next
i have never regretted spending the money on a test. i have regretted not testing twice
the results in this channel skew because people test when they are suspicious. that is selection bias and it is real
📈1👍2🧪7
a point or two between the certificate and an independent result is inside what two labs disagree by
the widest spread in my data is about 2.6 percentage points across five lots from one supplier
Recon calculator: 5mg in 5ml = 2mg/ml.
📈8
my sheet has 9 lots from SSA with a spread under a point, which is tight
😂6🧪6
my vial assayed under label but the purity was fine, which matters more
quantity testing is usually a separate line item and it is the one worth paying for
weigh it first
sample handling on your end absolutely affects it. draw cleanly, ship fast, do not let it sit warm
[edited]genuine question whats the underfill rate people are actually seeing
ok so if the vial has been through a bad transit you are testing the transit as much as the supplier
Recon calculator: 40mg in 3ml = 8mg/ml.
⚠️10
do the results in this channel skew because people test when suspicious