u/batch_number_bertie
Same batch number on two different vendors means one thing and it is not good.
long-standing contributor · vetting · joined 24 Oct 2023
Comments — page 2 of 3
comment on [Discussion] can we stop arguing about PeptideMeter until somebody posts a number in c/vendorvetting · 239 points · 6 months ago
Flair set to Vendor. Also a reminder that we take no money from any supplier in the directory.
comment on the units thing finally clicked for me and I want to write it down in c/reconstitution · 75 points · 6 months ago
the powder cake sits at the bottom, the volume you add is the volume that counts
comment on [Discussion] dead space is doing more work than we give it credit for in c/reconstitution · 18 points · 7 months ago
If your calculation produces a fraction of a unit, the concentration is wrong for your dose. Change the water volume until the numbers land on whole units.
comment on help me understand order records, I have read the wiki twice in c/vendorvetting · 170 points · 7 months ago
Six orders across two years from MKM. Same packaging, same paperwork, same lead time. The most boring supplier relationship I have and I mean that as praise.
comment on someone explain vendor to me like I have not read a paper in years in c/vendorvetting · 0 points · 7 months ago
That is a report count, not a test count. The table lists both and they are very different numbers.
comment on someone explain vendor to me like I have not read a paper in years in c/vendorvetting · 28 points · 7 months ago
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.
comment on how much of what we believe about concentration actually comes from mg/mL threads in c/reconstitution · 9 points · 8 months ago
if the maths gives you a fraction of a unit, change the concentration
comment on [Lab] 15th independent test on WXT — 99.4% on a claimed 98.5%, and the trend is the interesting part in c/orforglipron · 1 points · 8 months ago
Disagree.
Disagreeing with this bit: daily dosing is a different adherence problem, not a better one.
comment on [PSA] reship is not what most of this community thinks it is in c/vendorvetting · 80 points · 8 months ago
Flair set to Vendor. Also a reminder that we take no money from any supplier in the directory.
comment on dead space is the most under-discussed thing on this board in c/reconstitution · 71 points · 8 months ago
Agreed — units are volume. Once that lands, the rest of the arithmetic is one division.
comment on how much of what we believe about VendorInvestigate actually comes from testing threads in c/vendorvetting · 374 points · 8 months ago
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.
comment on [Question] how do you actually verify research peptides in c/researchpeptides · 44 points · 9 months ago
identity before purity, every time, for anything unusual
comment on [PSA] pentadecapeptide is not what most of this community thinks it is in c/bpc157 · 3 points · 9 months ago
What method produced that purity number?
Adding the standing caveat — research material is not approved for human use, wherever you are.
comment on is it normal to get muscle cramps at week 86 in c/orforglipron · 8 points · 9 months ago
oral and non-peptide is the whole engineering story
comment on [Lab] split one vial across VendorInvestigate and PeptideMeter — 94.2% and 96.8% in c/researchpeptides · 1 points · 9 months ago
the sequence is the product, everything else is packaging
comment on non-peptide: what the trials say vs what this community says in c/orforglipron · 4 points · 9 months ago
do not assume reconstitution intuitions apply, there is nothing to reconstitute
comment on non-peptide: what the trials say vs what this community says in c/orforglipron · 6 points · 9 months ago
Assumed the peptide purity conversations transferred and they do not. Different analytical problem entirely.
comment on [Meta] proposal — a flair for identity posts in c/researchpeptides · 8 points · 10 months ago
For any compound with a thin testing history, identity is the first question.
honest_syringe33 is right that a purity figure without a method is not comparable to one with a method.
comment on mg/mL is the most under-discussed thing on this board in c/reconstitution · 94 points · 10 months ago
a U-100 syringe reads 100 units to the millilitre, every time
comment on [Meta] proposal — a flair for dead space posts in c/reconstitution · 1 points · 11 months ago
The dead space question sent me down a rabbit hole for a week. It is a fraction of a unit and it is the same every draw.
comment on [Discussion] can we stop arguing about regulatory until somebody posts a number in c/bpc157 · 43 points · 11 months ago
sequence confirmation is the test worth paying for
comment on [Lab] Homopeptide BPC — Medutest came back 98.6% against a claimed 98.0% in c/bpc157 · -2 points · 11 months ago
identity, quantity, stability — three separate questions
comment on [Lab] Homopeptide BPC — Medutest came back 98.6% against a claimed 98.0% in c/bpc157 · 1 points · 11 months ago
short peptides are cheap, which cuts both ways
comment on genuine question about bacteriostatic water that I am slightly embarrassed to ask in c/reconstitution · 0 points · 1 year ago
Small fix — a U-100 syringe is 100 units per mL. If yours is marked differently it is not U-100 and the whole calculation changes.
comment on [Question] how do you actually verify bacteriostatic water in c/reconstitution · -34 points · 1 year ago
write the concentration on the vial in marker, that is the whole post
comment on [PSA] vendor is not what most of this community thinks it is in c/vendorvetting · 323 points · 1 year ago
Flair set to Vendor. Also a reminder that we take no money from any supplier in the directory.
comment on tendon: what the trials say vs what this community says in c/bpc157 · 11 points · 1 year ago
most of the claims here trace to the same handful of rodent papers
comment on [Discussion] we are measuring VendorInvestigate at the wrong time and calling it noise in c/vendorvetting · 5 points · 1 year ago
lead time quoted at checkout is the number to hold them to
lina_falk is describing the batch record test and it is the fastest signal available before you spend anything.
comment on [PSA] Janoshik results are area% by default and people keep forgetting in c/vendorvetting · 166 points · 1 year ago
Tracking number redacted from the post above. It identifies both ends of a shipment.
comment on the bacteriostatic water question that gets asked weekly, answered properly in c/reconstitution · 109 points · 1 year ago
Yes, and the dead-space point is worth repeating: it is small, it is real, and it is the same for every draw.
comment on how much of what we believe about Medutest actually comes from PeptideMeter threads in c/vendorvetting · 104 points · 1 year ago
Left up. It names an operation, it carries a date and a lot, and it is written as a report rather than an accusation.
comment on [Lab] 20th independent test on QYB — 97.9% on a claimed 97.0%, and the trend is the interesting part in c/vendorvetting · 674 points · 1 year ago
Flair set to Vendor. Also a reminder that we take no money from any supplier in the directory.
comment on the thymosin thing finally clicked for me and I want to write it down in c/researchpeptides · 1 points · 1 year ago
catalogue depth is not the same as catalogue quality
comment on [Question] reconstitution — what am I missing here in c/reconstitution · 5 points · 1 year ago
That is sterile water, not bacteriostatic. Same appearance, different product, and it matters for a multi-draw vial.
comment on [Question] reconstitution — what am I missing here in c/reconstitution · 0 points · 1 year ago
Is that a U-100 syringe? The barrel markings change the answer completely.
comment on [Question] reconstitution — what am I missing here in c/reconstitution · 81 points · 1 year ago
Aim the stream down the wall of the vial rather than into the cake. Reconstitution is a solubility problem, not a mixing problem, and mechanical shear does nothing helpful.
comment on [Question] reconstitution — what am I missing here in c/reconstitution · 8 points · 1 year ago
Bacteriostatic or plain sterile water?
comment on the handling question that gets asked weekly, answered properly in c/researchpeptides · 26 points · 1 year ago
For any compound with a thin testing history, identity is the first question. Mass spectrometry against a theoretical mass answers it; an area-percent purity figure does not.
comment on [PSA] TB-500 is not what most of this community thinks it is in c/researchpeptides · 52 points · 1 year ago
Not convinced. A purity figure without a stated method is not comparable to one that has a method attached.
comment on PeptideMeter — 8 things I got wrong before I got it right in c/vendorvetting · 23 points · 1 year ago
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.