[Discussion] the below spec advice in here is 2 years out of date
the below spec advice in here is 2 years out of date. I have gone back and forth on this for months. The numbers the title promised, since a headline without them is worthless: 2 years. Everything below is context for those. The template is vendor, compound, batch, service, claim, result, and who paid. Every one of…
A series across separate lots estimates a process. Repeat tests on one lot estimate the measurement. Both are useful and they answer different questions.
Date of analysis anchors the result to a manufacturing period. A two-year-old result is evidence about two years ago and should be read that way.
three lots beats three tests on one lot
split a vial across two services once and you will never argue about ground truth again
Area percent and net peptide content are different measurements and most reports give one. Quote which, or the comparison downstream is meaningless.
Chain of custody is why member-funded testing is worth more than a supplied certificate: the vial tested is the vial that arrived at a member’s door.
That reading assumes area percent and net peptide content are the same number. They are not, and the report says which it is.