[Discussion] the below spec advice in here is 2 years out of date
the below spec advice in here is 2 years out of date. I have gone back and forth on this for months. The numbers the title promised, since a headline without them is worthless: 2 years. Everything below is context for those. The template is vendor, compound, batch, service, claim, result, and who paid. Every one of…
Merged with the other thread on the same batch so the results sit together.
Did the vial lot match the paperwork lot?
Disagree that this is a discrepancy. 98.1% against a claimed 97.5% is inside ordinary inter-lab variance in either direction.
if you are going to test, test the thing you actually received
Yes. Two services on the same batch is the strongest thing an individual member can produce, and it is not expensive.
This. The trend across separate lots is the number that tells you about a process rather than a vial.
results without method are gossip with decimals
[deleted]
Batch number and date of analysis?
Area percent or net peptide content?
Correcting myself: I quoted net peptide content against somebody else’s area percent. Not a comparison.