is it worth testing if the vial has already been through a warm transit
#test-results 2026-02-20
Friday18 messages5 participantstimes are UTC
Highlights from this day
- bea_reconstitutes — update on the earlier thing the results in this channel skew because people test when they are suspicious. that is selection bias and it is real 20:14
- impersonator_ip — if the vial has been through a bad transit you are testing the transit as much as the supplier 20:26
- impersonator_ip — my read after three years of this: purity is mostly fine across the market and fill consistency is where suppliers differ 21:09
- swirl_not_shake — has a supplier ever disputed a result posted here 21:13
- swirl_not_shake — 97.4 against a certificate of 98.1 is fine. the same supplier landing low four times in a row is a question, someone check my working 23:20
certificate said 98.1 and the independent came back 97.4, is that a problem
does anyone log the negative results, the boring ones
update on the earlier thing the results in this channel skew because people test when they are suspicious. that is selection bias and it is real
what interests me is when the gap goes the same direction every time. once is noise, three times is a pattern
sorry to jump in a result without a lot number and a purchase date is an anecdote with a pdf attached
if the vial has been through a bad transit you are testing the transit as much as the supplier
| 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 |
bea_reconstitutesupdate on the earlier thing the results in this channel skew because people test when…
a point or two between the certificate and an independent result is inside what two labs disagree by
i have never regretted spending the money on a test. i have regretted not testing twice
whats the worst result anyone has logged and what happened next
my read after three years of this: purity is mostly fine across the market and fill consistency is where suppliers differ
🧊14
when did you buy it
has a supplier ever disputed a result posted here
🙏6❤️4💀11
one data point
how do you separate batch variance from supplier variance
unrelated but i had a result i am fairly sure was a handling error on my side and i logged it as such
weigh the vial before you reconstitute. it costs nothing and catches the common failure, anyway
bea_reconstitutesupdate on the earlier thing the results in this channel skew because people test when…
97.4 against a certificate of 98.1 is fine. the same supplier landing low four times in a row is a question, someone check my working