GLPHubglpresearchhub.com
Read-only archive. GLP Research Hub is a static community record — nothing here is for sale, no account is needed, and no vote you cast is counted. Why?
Single comment threadYou are looking at one branch of [Discussion] the Janoshik advice in here is 20 years out of date — 49 comments in the full submission. View in context.
2.2k
c/labresults·submitted 1 year ago by u/elise_ramos

[Discussion] the Janoshik advice in here is 20 years out of date

Discussionbranch of 16 comments

Trying to settle this properly because the thread from last year went in circles. The claim: purity matters. The counter-claim: it is measurement error. Both sides have been asserting it confidently for about 4 months without either producing anything. What would actually settle it is 37 people measuring the same…

Read the full submission and all 49 comments →

This branch

16 comments, started 1 year ago
u/fatima_wojcik221 points·1 year ago

This result fits the template perfectly. Logged.

replysharereportpermalink
u/plateau_patrol337 points·1 year ago

below-spec results get logged, not dismissed

replysharereportpermalink
u/anders_karlsen160 points·1 year ago

below-spec results get logged, not dismissed

Counter-anecdote: opposite result, same dose. Which mostly tells us the variance is huge.

replysharereportpermalink
u/elise_ramosOP117 points·1 year ago

reship and retest is the honest way to handle a low result

replysharereportpermalink
u/rina_sobczak79 points·1 year ago

below-spec results get logged, not dismissed Counter-anecdote: opposite result, same dose.

Yes, exactly this, and it is the bit that took me 80 weeks to accept.

replysharereportpermalink
u/kenji_demir52 points·1 year ago

This result fits the template perfectly.

Adding to this: Medutest is doing more work than the comment implies.

replysharereportpermalink
u/mateusz_mensah18 points·1 year ago

Respectfully this is a sample of one presented as a finding.

replysharereportpermalink
u/enzo_fonseca34 points·1 year ago

do not editorialise in the title, put the number in the title and the opinion in the body

replysharereportpermalink
u/marisol_moreau13 points·1 year ago

Yeah, the Medutest number matching the claim is the actual signal.

replysharereportpermalink
u/clara_weiss17 points·1 year ago

This result fits the template perfectly. Logged.

replysharereportpermalink
u/matias_falk25 points·1 year ago

do not editorialise in the title, put the number in the title and the opinion in the body

replysharereportpermalink
u/yara_mensah103 points·1 year ago

This result fits the template perfectly.

Counter-anecdote: opposite result, same dose. Which mostly tells us the variance is huge.

replysharereportpermalink
u/emil_agyeman33 points·1 year ago·edited

do not editorialise in the title, put the number in the title and the opinion in the body

replysharereportpermalink
u/elise_ramosOP37 points·1 year ago

the 93.7% result confirmed the vendor claim, that is the signal

replysharereportpermalink
u/jonas_cardoso24 points·1 year ago

the 93.7% result confirmed the vendor claim, that is the signal

Adding to this: Janoshik is doing more work than the comment implies.

replysharereportpermalink
u/coring_the_stopper8 points·1 year ago·edited

Slight fix: the number was 97.4, not 97.2. Decimal point, but a fairly consequential one.

replysharereportpermalink

← back to the whole thread

About c/labresults

A running record of independent test results people paid for themselves. Every post follows the same shape: vendor, product, batch, testing service, method, and the number. Good results and bad results are equally welcome and get equal scrutiny.

44kmembers
95submissions
Oct 2023created
submissions / month, last year
Sponsored

Sigma-Aldrich Standards

Certified reference materials for peptide identity and purity work.

sigmaaldrich.com
c/labresults rules
  1. Template required: vendor / product / batch / service / method / result. Freeform posts get removed with a template reply.
  2. Do not editorialise in the title. Put the number in the title and the opinion in the body.
  3. Sample of one. Say so.
  4. Independent community. Nobody here sells anything, and anyone who tries is banned.
  5. Not medical advice. Describe what you did; never prescribe to a stranger.
  6. Claims need evidence. Batch numbers, dated screenshots, independent test reports, or a citation.
  7. No referral links, discount codes or affiliate URLs. Permanent ban, no appeal.
  8. No contact handles, wallet addresses or tracking numbers — they identify people.
  9. Be recognisably decent. Disagree hard, insult nobody.
Moderators
Volunteers. Unpaid, unaffiliated, and reachable through modmail only.
Before you read on

Several compounds discussed on GLP Research Hub are sold for research use only and are not approved for human use anywhere. Nothing here is medical advice and none of it is written by your clinician. If a post reads like an instruction, treat it as a description of what one stranger did.