a good result with bad sample handling gets logged with a note about the handling. context is part of the record
#vendor-verification 2026-04-03
Friday43 messages8 participantstimes are UTC
Highlights from this day
- pbs_pip — how long does a verification stay current before it needs refreshing 20:52
- lot_number_lou — if the evidence is thin the entry says the evidence is thin. that is more useful than a score, ill dig out the number 21:21
- amylin_amy — a verified supplier can still ship you a bad vial. verification is about the record, not about your parcel a good result with bad sample handling gets logged with a… 21:38
revoked stays in the log
two labs disagree on the same lot, which one goes in the log
🧊9
update from 11 months ago: GGPeps added evidence and the entry now reflects it
do blinded submissions carry more weight than open ones
🙏8⚠️1
why is a referral link disqualifying rather than just ignored
[edited]what does not count: the supplier certificate alone, a screenshot, a referral link, or a friend who says it was fine
what counts: an independent report, on a lot you bought yourself, with the lot number, from a lab the room recognises, i think
has anyone ever offered to pay for verification
a lot number mismatch between the vial and the certificate is a serious finding. post it with photos of both
coming back after 13 months, has the standard changed
nothing gets deleted
two labs a point or two apart on one lot is normal. both go in the log with both numbers, i think
nothing gets deleted from the log, including our own mistakes
*VendorInvestigate not the other one
refresh on evidence
we have never revoked on a single result. we have revoked on a pattern
✅3👀4📈1
how long does a verification stay current before it needs refreshing
🧊1🎉1👀17
the point of the standard is that it applies to suppliers we like as well as ones we do not
sorry to jump in verification has never been for sale and never will be. offers get posted publicly with the sender redacted
never for sale, ask me again in a month
both numbers go in
🤝1
if the evidence is thin the entry says the evidence is thin. that is more useful than a score, ill dig out the number
vial-e-2205-front.png
900 × 1200 · 289 KB · not retained in the public archive
🔥8
is the verification log the same thing as a recommendation
is a screenshot of a report ever acceptable
a verified supplier can still ship you a bad vial. verification is about the record, not about your parcel
a good result with bad sample handling gets logged with a note about the handling. context is part of the record
the lot number on the certificate does not match my vial, what now
is there a version of the log i can read chronologically
thin evidence
the log is readable chronologically and that is deliberate. the trajectory matters more than the current line
what happens to the log entry when a supplier improves
lot number or nothing
🧪15🙏15⚠️7
thats evidence
does a supplier certificate on its own count for anything
update on the earlier thing has verification ever been reinstated after a revocation
does a good result from PeptideMeter outweigh a bad one from Medutest
we refresh on new evidence, not on a clock. an old verification with no recent results says so on the entry
*VendorInvestigate not the other one
how do you handle a result that is good but the sample handling was poor
post the photos
a referral link is disqualifying because it makes the reporter an interested party. that is all
not a recommendation
⚠️15💀17👀5
follow up does Homopeptide being verified mean my vial is fine