[Below Spec] 88% is not "basically fine" and i am tired of that reply
Quick one. Canada here.
batch works very differently where I live than in the threads that dominate the front page, and I keep seeing people confidently given advice that simply does not apply outside the US.
Specifics: the route I used took 14 weeks and cost roughly what I expected. The admin was worse than the cost. The thing that would have saved me the most time was knowing which document to ask for at the start.
Happy to answer questions from anyone in the same jurisdiction.
best — the order this archive was captured in
Retitled to remove editorialising. Put the evidence in the body.
the 96.8% result confirmed the vendor claim, that is the signal
the 98.1% result confirmed the vendor claim, that is the signal
Which Medutest service and what method did they use?
Which Medutest service and what method did they use?
Disagree but this is the good kind of wrong — it is specific enough to be checked.
KP / BPC / batch 5 / Janoshik / 98.9% — that is the shape
Tested 15 batches from TFC over 38 weeks. Spread was 98.3% to 98.4, mostly 98.3. Consistent vendor.
Yeah, the Janoshik number matching the claim is the actual signal.
[removed by moderator]
This result fits the template perfectly. Logged.
below-spec results get logged, not dismissed
This result fits the template perfectly.
Adding to this: batch is doing more work than the comment implies.
CPC / BPC / batch 5 / VendorInvestigate / 98.4% — that is the shape
Tested 14 batches from QST over 90 weeks. Spread was 99.2% to 99.1, mostly 99.2. Consistent vendor.
testing the vendor claim versus testing your actual vial are two different posts
the 96.8% result confirmed the vendor claim, that is the signal
Strongly agree. Below-spec results matter as much as good ones.
testing the vendor claim versus testing your actual vial are two different posts
below-spec results get logged, not dismissed
This is the "correlation is mechanism" thing again. You changed three variables at once.
Inter-lab variance on this kind of assay is routinely 1–2 points. Different column, different gradient, different integration.
template required: vendor / product / batch / service / method / result
Respectfully this is a sample of one presented as a finding.
the 97.9% result confirmed the vendor claim, that is the signal
Which VendorInvestigate service and what method did they use?
Which VendorInvestigate service and what method did they use?
Adding to this: Janoshik is doing more work than the comment implies.
- 1Tested 14 batches from QST over 90 weeks. Spread was 99.2% to 99.1, mostly…7 comments in this branch · started by u/mariam_cabrera
- 2Inter-lab variance on this kind of assay is routinely 1–2 points. Different…7 comments in this branch · started by u/joaquin_trevino