GLPHubglpresearchhub.com
Read-only archive. GLP Research Hub is a static community record — nothing here is for sale, no account is needed, and no vote you cast is counted. Why?
Single comment threadYou are looking at one branch of [Lab] split one vial across Medutest and Janoshik — 97.6% and 95.1% — 33 comments in the full submission. View in context.
946
c/labresults·submitted 2 months ago by u/rina_bergstrom

[Lab] split one vial across Medutest and Janoshik — 97.6% and 95.1%

Labbranch of 10 comments

split one vial across Medutest and Janoshik — 97.6% and 95.1%. That is the headline. The document, the batch and the service are below so you can argue with the method rather than with me. Pulling the figures out of the title: 97.6% and 95.1%. All of it is written down as it happened rather than reconstructed. BCH…

Read the full submission and all 33 comments →

This branch

10 comments, started 2 months ago
u/throwaway_44b1-24 points·2 months ago

Do you have the trace, or only the summary?

replysharereportpermalink
u/marisol_moreau1 point·2 months ago

Cosigning on saying who paid. It is the whole basis on which this log is worth anything.

replysharereportpermalink
u/enzo_fonseca1 point·2 months ago

Cosigning on saying who paid.

This is why the template has a batch field. Without it the result is about a vial nobody can identify.

replysharereportpermalink
u/britta_boateng1 point·2 months ago

one result is a data point, agreement between two services is evidence

replysharereportpermalink
u/rina_bergstrom1 point·2 months ago

Correcting myself: I quoted net peptide content against somebody else’s area percent. Not a comparison.

replysharereportpermalink
u/milan_villalobos1 point·2 months ago

area percent unless the report says otherwise

replysharereportpermalink
u/meera_sandvik1 point·2 months ago

three lots beats three tests on one lot

replysharereportpermalink
u/thandi_solberg1 point·2 months ago

Which service, and did you pay for it yourself?

replysharereportpermalink
u/rina_bergstromOP1 point·2 months ago

Did the vial lot match the paperwork lot?

replysharereportpermalink
u/elise_ramos1 point·2 months ago

the trend across lots is worth more than any single figure

replysharereportpermalink

← back to the whole thread

About c/labresults

A running record of independent test results people paid for themselves. Every post follows the same shape: vendor, product, batch, testing service, method, and the number. Good results and bad results are equally welcome and get equal scrutiny.

44kmembers
95submissions
Oct 2023created
submissions / month, last year
Sponsored

Sigma-Aldrich Standards

Certified reference materials for peptide identity and purity work.

sigmaaldrich.com
c/labresults rules
  1. Template required: vendor / product / batch / service / method / result. Freeform posts get removed with a template reply.
  2. Do not editorialise in the title. Put the number in the title and the opinion in the body.
  3. Sample of one. Say so.
  4. Independent community. Nobody here sells anything, and anyone who tries is banned.
  5. Not medical advice. Describe what you did; never prescribe to a stranger.
  6. Claims need evidence. Batch numbers, dated screenshots, independent test reports, or a citation.
  7. No referral links, discount codes or affiliate URLs. Permanent ban, no appeal.
  8. No contact handles, wallet addresses or tracking numbers — they identify people.
  9. Be recognisably decent. Disagree hard, insult nobody.
Moderators
Volunteers. Unpaid, unaffiliated, and reachable through modmail only.
Before you read on

Several compounds discussed on GLP Research Hub are sold for research use only and are not approved for human use anywhere. Nothing here is medical advice and none of it is written by your clinician. If a post reads like an instruction, treat it as a description of what one stranger did.