[Question] below spec — what am I missing here
Trying to get a straight answer on this: below spec — what am I missing here.
Chain of custody is why member-funded testing is worth more than a supplied certificate: the vial tested is the vial that arrived at a member’s door.
Area percent and net peptide content are different measurements and most reports give one. Quote which, or the comparison downstream is meaningless.
A series across separate lots estimates a process. Repeat tests on one lot estimate the measurement. Both are useful and they answer different questions.
Would rather be corrected in public than confident in private.
best — the order this archive was captured in
Inter-lab variance on this assay runs roughly a point either way, driven mostly by gradient and integration. Two results inside that band agree; they do not disagree quietly.
[removed by moderator]
That service reports area percent by default. Worth stating, since the thread has been comparing it to a mass figure.
vendor, compound, batch, service, result — that is the template
Kept every report as a PDF with the batch in the filename. Two years in, it is the most useful folder I own.
Yes — date of analysis, because a result from two years ago describes a different manufacturing month.
How to build a series that means something, if you are going to spend money on testing anyway.
Three tests on one lot tells you about your measurement. Three tests on three lots, spread over a year, tells you about a process. The second is the one worth paying for and it costs the same.
Buy small, keep the batch numbers, send one vial per lot, and post each one with the claim next to it. After four or five you have something no individual review can give you: a band, a direction and a date range. That is what the source pages are made of.
How many separate lots does your series cover?
I would not post that as a finding. It is a single result and the template asks you to say so.
the trend across lots is worth more than any single figure