help me understand VendorInvestigate, I have read the wiki twice
help me understand VendorInvestigate, I have read the wiki twice. I am not trying to be the "source?" guy. I would just like a source.
Lead time and minimum quantity are the two facts people forget to ask for and then argue about later. Both are answerable in one email before you commit.
Inter-lab variance on this assay runs a point or two either way. Two services disagreeing by that much is agreement, not a discrepancy, and treating it otherwise starts pointless arguments.
The wider-market rows in the directory carry a band and a report count and nothing else, deliberately. Anything more would be manufacturing precision that the evidence does not support.
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
Independent testing is worth more than a supplied certificate for one structural reason: the chain of custody. A member who buys, ships and pays is testing the same thing you would receive.
Yes, and the reason the wider-market table has no scores is that a score built on two reports would be a lie with a decimal point.
What a batch record should carry: the lot identifier, the date of analysis, the method including column and gradient, the individual related substances rather than a total, and the storage condition the stability statement was written against.
Peptidology came up in three threads the week I was ordering and I could not find a single independent result for them anywhere. Went with a documented supplier instead.
Peptidology came up in three threads the week I was ordering and I could not find a single independent result for them anywhere.
This is the whole method in one sentence. Everything else in the thread is elaboration.
A certificate with a purity figure and no method line is not falsifiable. You cannot reproduce it, you cannot check it, and it tells you nothing about how the number was produced.
This is the whole method in one sentence.
ghrp_history is describing the batch record test and it is the fastest signal available before you spend anything.
Right — TFC publishes the method line on the certificate, and once you have seen one that does you notice every one that does not.
That is a report count, not a test count. The table lists both and they are very different numbers.
a supplier that answers method questions in writing has already told you a lot
Swiss Chems shows up in threads constantly and has almost nothing on file
a claim with no batch number is a marketing document
a claim with no batch number is a marketing document
Would qualify this slightly. Fewer entries means less sampling, and less sampling is not the same as a worse process.