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?
324
c/vendorvetting·posted 1 months ago by u/greta_perrin

[Needs Source] "lab tested" with no lab named is not a claim

Needs Source Cold Box ×6

Trying to settle this properly because the thread from last year went in circles.

The claim: PeptideMeter matters. The counter-claim: it is measurement error. Both sides have been asserting it confidently for about 6 months without either producing anything.

What would actually settle it is 37 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.

506 up / 182 down74% upvoted28 commentsid 14p5ny19 Jun 2026

28 comments

22 in this archive, depth 5

best — the order this archive was captured in

u/greta_lokken70 points·1 months ago
this deserves more than 12 upvotes
replysharereportpermalink
u/greta_perrinOP45 points·1 months ago

one vendor per post, multi-vendor goes in the monthly thread

replysharereportpermalink
u/search_before_post36 points·1 months ago

did they reship, credit, or ghost you?

replysharereportpermalink
u/greta_perrinOP18 points·1 months ago

Cosigning the evidence standard. Receipts make the community.

replysharereportpermalink
u/search_before_post5 points·1 months ago

receipts or nothing, sorry but that is the rule

replysharereportpermalink
u/pavel_kravchenko27 points·1 months ago

the reship rate on SWB is actually pretty consistent

replysharereportpermalink
[removed]52 points·1 months ago

[removed by moderator]

replysharereportpermalink
u/matias_falk43 points·1 months ago

Disagree. What you are describing is consistent with Janoshik, not with what you concluded.

replysharereportpermalink
u/janoshik_junkieMOD28 points·1 months ago

Flair changed to match the content. Read the sidebar before posting next time and we are square.

replysharereportpermalink
u/boots_or_bust17 points·1 months ago

Correct. The batch number is load-bearing information, not optional.

replysharereportpermalink
u/greta_perrinOP12 points·1 months ago

How many orders from MKM is that a sample of? One reship is noise, five is a pattern.

replysharereportpermalink
u/viktor_girard11 points·1 months ago·edited

independent test or vendor COA, which is it

replysharereportpermalink
u/lane_map_larrylogistics5 points·1 months ago

receipts or nothing, sorry but that is the rule

replysharereportpermalink
u/greta_lokken34 points·1 months ago

the reship rate on ERP is actually pretty consistent

replysharereportpermalink
u/zofia_lindholm21 points·1 months ago

You have restated the marketing copy. What is the actual substance here.

replysharereportpermalink
u/receipts_or_nothingvetting14 points·1 months ago

independent test or vendor COA, which is it

replysharereportpermalink
u/lina_falk22 points·1 months ago

Respectfully this is a sample of one presented as a finding.

replysharereportpermalink
u/sig_figs_sammod · analytical10 points·1 months ago

QYB order #17, Germany, no drama, receipts inside

replysharereportpermalink
u/purity_pedantanalytical7 points·1 months ago

How many orders from WWB is that a sample of? One reship is noise, five is a pattern.

replysharereportpermalink
u/boots_or_bust2 points·1 months ago

How many orders from WWB is that a sample of?

Adding to this: order records is doing more work than the comment implies.

replysharereportpermalink
load more comments (1) →
u/honest_syringe1918 points·1 months ago

Respectfully this is a sample of one presented as a finding.

Adding to this: VendorInvestigate is doing more work than the comment implies.

replysharereportpermalink
Permalinked branches
Deep branches get their own page so a single reply chain can be linked and read on its own.
About c/vendorvetting

The community due-diligence desk. Vendor experiences, independent third-party test results, shipping and reship records, and the boring paperwork that separates a supplier from a story. Every substantive claim is expected to carry a receipt: an order id, a dated screenshot, or a test report from Janoshik, Medutest, PeptideMeter or VendorInvestigate.

96kmembers
130submissions
Aug 2023created
submissions / month, last year
Sponsored

Sigma-Aldrich Standards

Certified reference materials for peptide identity and purity work.

sigmaaldrich.com
c/vendorvetting rules
  1. One vendor per post. Multi-vendor comparisons go in the monthly comparison thread.
  2. No referral links, discount codes or affiliate URLs. Zero tolerance, permanent ban.
  3. Positive and negative reports both need the same evidence standard: order date, product, and what was tested.
  4. Vendor staff must self-identify. Undisclosed vendor accounts are banned on sight.
  5. Independent community. Nobody here sells anything, and anyone who tries is banned.
  6. Not medical advice. Describe what you did; never prescribe to a stranger.
  7. Claims need evidence. Batch numbers, dated screenshots, independent test reports, or a citation.
  8. No referral links, discount codes or affiliate URLs. Permanent ban, no appeal.
  9. No contact handles, wallet addresses or tracking numbers — they identify people.
  10. 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.