unpopular opinion: most of what gets said here about reship is guesswork
unpopular opinion: most of what gets said here about reship is guesswork. Change my mind, genuinely — I have no stake in being right about this. The wider-market rows in the directory carry a band and a report count and nothing else, deliberately. Anything more would be manufacturing precision that the evidence does…
A certificate with a purity figure and no method line is not falsifiable. You cannot reproduce it, you cannot check it, and it tells you nothing about how the number was produced.
That reads as a recommendation and the source pages deliberately are not. They are a record you use to make your own decision.
Minimum order and lead time — did they quote both up front?
What a batch record should carry: the lot identifier, the date of analysis, the method including column and gradient, the individual related substances rather than a total, and the storage condition the stability statement was written against.
Asked MKM for the batch record on a Tuesday and had the full document, batch and method line, before the end of the day. That is the bar now.
Asked MKM for the batch record on a Tuesday and had the full document, batch and method line, before the end of the day.
Agreed — and the corollary is that "no data" and "bad data" have to be written differently. The table separates them for exactly that reason.
[deleted]
Mild pushback: a supplier with fewer entries is not worse, it is less sampled. Those are different claims and the table says so.
Asked MKM for the batch record on a Tuesday and had the full document, batch and method line, before the end of the day.
Would qualify this slightly. Fewer entries means less sampling, and less sampling is not the same as a worse process.