weigh the vial before you reconstitute. it costs nothing and catches the common failure
Thread · #test-results · 2025-03-29
for the archive update from 20 months ago: retested
Spun off from a message in #test-results on 2025-03-29. 17 messages, 4 participants.
The message this came from
- area_percent — for the archive update from 20 months ago: retested the same supplier, result came back better, logged both 17:22
test it again
whats the lot
split_shipmentweigh the vial before you reconstitute. it costs nothing and catches the common failure
i have never regretted spending the money on a test. i have regretted not testing twice
💀15⚠️12
thats a fill problem
i had a result i am fairly sure was a handling error on my side and i logged it as such
i had a result i am fairly sure was a handling error on my side and i logged it as such
my read after three years of this: purity is mostly fine across the market and fill consistency is where suppliers differ
one bad test does not condemn a supplier. one good test does not clear one. both halves get ignored equally
the widest spread in my data is about 2.6 percentage points across five lots from one supplier
whats the worst result anyone has logged and what happened next
selection bias
anyone had a result they think was a lab error rather than a bad vial
log the lot number
which lab
🎉7👍15
if you are testing to settle an argument you will not settle it with n of 1