a single sample tells you about a single vial. that is genuinely all it tells you
#test-results 2026-05-03
Sunday16 messages5 participantstimes are UTC
Highlights from this day
i have never regretted spending the money on a test. i have regretted not testing twice
quantity testing is usually a separate line item and it is the one worth paying for
weigh the vial before you reconstitute. it costs nothing and catches 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 |
if the vial has been through a bad transit you are testing the transit as much as the supplier
one bad test does not condemn a supplier. one good test does not clear one. both halves get ignored equally
does anyone log the negative results, the boring ones
i had a result i am fairly sure was a handling error on my side and i logged it as such, ill dig out the number
i told FGP about a result they would not have liked and they did not argue. credit where it is due
attach the pdf
Digest for the week of 2026-02-05 has been published.
anyone had a result they think was a lab error rather than a bad vial
when did you buy it
my vial assayed under label but the purity was fine, which matters more
log the boring results too. a channel that only records failures produces a false picture
thats a fill problem