three years of test results threads, summarised so you do not have to read them
Trying to settle this properly because the thread from last year went in circles.
The claim: test results 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 27 people measuring the same thing the same way. I have started; my numbers are below. They lean one way but not strongly enough for me to declare victory.
If you have data, post the data. If you have an opinion, flair it as an opinion.
best — the order this archive was captured in
This result fits the template perfectly. Logged.
Small correction: the trial was 19 weeks, not 5. Does not change your point but people will quote it.
Small correction: the trial was 19 weeks, not 5.
Adding to this: Medutest is doing more work than the comment implies.
I am going to push back on this slightly.
template required: vendor / product / batch / service / method / result
testing the vendor claim versus testing your actual vial are two different posts
Yeah, the VendorInvestigate number matching the claim is the actual signal.
That is net peptide content, not purity. Different number, different meaning.
Strongly agree. Below-spec results matter as much as good ones.
JEEP / BPC / batch 20 / Janoshik / 97.6% — that is the shape
QSC product, PeptideMeter test, 96.2% result, batch 11, 12 days in transit. Logged.
template required: vendor / product / batch / service / method / result
template required: vendor / product / batch / service / method / result
Counter-anecdote: opposite result, same dose. Which mostly tells us the variance is huge.
below-spec results get logged, not dismissed
I am going to push back on this slightly.
template required: vendor / product / batch / service / method / result
template required: vendor / product / batch / service / method / result
Counter-anecdote: opposite result, same dose. Which mostly tells us the variance is huge.
the 99.2% result confirmed the vendor claim, that is the signal
Which Medutest service and what method did they use?
Strongly agree. Below-spec results matter as much as good ones.
Strongly agree. Below-spec results matter as much as good ones.
testing the vendor claim versus testing your actual vial are two different posts
the 99.0% result confirmed the vendor claim, that is the signal
I am going to push back on this slightly.
Disagree on that part. 98.7% and 98.9% on the same vial is normal.
Tracking number removed. It identifies both ends of a shipment.
My Janoshik result matched the vendor COA exactly, which is rare. TFC deserves that note in the directory.
- 1I am going to push back on this slightly.11 comments in this branch · started by u/lukas_vermeulen
- 2Yeah, the VendorInvestigate number matching the claim is the actual signal.4 comments in this branch · started by u/due_diligence_dee