[Below Spec] 61.2% on a vial i had already been using for six weeks
Posting this because it is the worst result in my log and hiding it would be pointless.
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
| Vendor | not naming yet — see below |
| Product | semaglutide 10mg |
| Service | Janoshik |
| Claimed | 99% |
| Result | 61.2% |
Not naming the vendor in the title because I need to rule out my own storage first. The vial sat in a fridge that I have since discovered runs at 7.8°C in the door, which is where it lived, and it had been punctured about eight times over six weeks.
61% is far outside anything storage should do to lyophilised powder, so I do not actually believe it is my fault. But "I do not believe it is my fault" is not the same as having checked, and this community has taught me the difference.
best — the order this archive was captured in
Thank you for holding the name back. This is genuinely the right call and I want to be explicit about why, because it looks like excessive caution and it is not.
A 61% result with an untested storage confound gets screenshotted and repeated for two years. If it turns out to be the vendor, naming them next week costs you nothing. If it turns out to be something else, naming them today is unretractable no matter how many corrections we publish.
Marking this Below Spec and leaving it. Update the post when you know more.
after the group buy i overcorrected into being extremely careful about accusations. turns out that is just the correct amount of careful.
Ruling out your storage: it is not your storage.
Sustained fridge-door temperatures around 8°C will not take lyophilised powder from 99 to 61. Dry powder does not degrade like that at 8°C on a six-week timescale — hydrolysis and deamidation need water, and a sealed dry vial does not have much.
What could matter is repeated puncturing, air exchange and whether the vial was reconstituted. Was it? Because a reconstituted vial sitting at 8°C in a door for six weeks with eight punctures is a completely different object and I would believe almost any number off that.
it was reconstituted. week one. edit: oh. oh no. so this is very possibly forty-two days of a mixed vial in the warmest part of a bad fridge.
Then that is your answer, and I am sorry, but also this is a genuinely useful post now rather than a vendor accusation.
Reconstituted solution is the fragile state. Everybody worries about the four days a package spent in a warm van and nobody worries about the six weeks a mixed vial spends in a kitchen. Your data point is the second thing and there is almost none of it published.
Crossposting to c/coldchain with the author's permission. We have very little published data on real-world reconstituted degradation and this is a data point, even an accidental one.
take it. if my £90 mistake stops one person storing a mixed vial in the door it was cheaper than most lessons i have paid for.
this is the most gracious handling of being wrong i have seen in here. well done genuinely.
NEVER THE DOOR. i have been shouting this for two years and this is the most expensive confirmation i have received.
worth noting the service did its job perfectly here. the number was correct, the interpretation was the hard part, and that is almost always the case.
should have named the vendor immediately, people are ordering from them right now
And it would have been the wrong vendor, as we now know. That is the entire argument, demonstrated in one thread, in under a day.
- 1Ruling out your storage: it is not your storage. Sustained fridge-door…6 comments in this branch · started by u/coldchain_karen