batch — 12 things I got wrong before I got it right
batch — 12 things I got wrong before I got it right. Not a hot take, just something I have not seen said plainly here.
Sent a vial in specifically to check a supplier’s claim after a good experience. It matched. Boring result, worth logging.
Tested three lots over a year rather than three vials from one lot. Cost the same and told me something completely different.
First result I ever posted here got asked for the batch number and the claim. Fair, and my posts have been better ever since.
That is everything I have. The rest is opinion and I have tried to keep it out.
best — the order this archive was captured in
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.
The template is vendor, compound, batch, service, claim, result, and who paid.
Disagreeing with this line: that gap is ordinary variance, not a contradiction between the lab and the certificate.
area percent unless the report says otherwise
Fourth lot from the same supplier in the log now and the band has been tight the whole way. That consistency is the actual finding.
inter-lab variance runs a point or two, plan your outrage accordingly
Right, and a point or two between services is ordinary. It is agreement, and every month somebody posts it as a scandal.
Yes. Two services on the same batch is the strongest thing an individual member can produce, and it is not expensive.
That reading assumes area percent and net peptide content are the same number. They are not, and the report says which it is.
one result is a data point, agreement between two services is evidence
if you are going to test, test the thing you actually received
Area percent and net peptide content are different measurements and most reports give one. Quote which, or the comparison downstream is meaningless.