test results — 21 things I got wrong before I got it right
test results — 21 things I got wrong before I got it right. Change my mind, genuinely — I have no stake in being right about this. 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. A series across separate lots estimates a…
What a result posted here is actually worth, and how to make yours worth more.
A single figure with no batch identifier is about a vial nobody can locate. Add the batch and it becomes about a lot. Add the claimed figure from the certificate and it becomes a comparison. Add the service and the date and it becomes reproducible. Say that you paid for it yourself and it becomes independent.
Five extra fields, thirty seconds of typing, and the difference between a comment and a row in the log that will still be useful in three years.
The template is vendor, compound, batch, service, claim, result, and who paid. Every one of those fields exists because a result missing it has been argued about here before.
What a result posted here is actually worth, and how to make yours worth more.
This is why the template has a batch field. Without it the result is about a vial nobody can identify.
[removed by moderator]
How many separate lots does your series cover?
Right, and a point or two between services is ordinary. It is agreement, and every month somebody posts it as a scandal.