u/arne_nyberg
Contributes reviews on supplier material. Based in Dhaka.
member · joined 12 Mar 2025
comment on [Caution] stacking with a sulfonylurea is a real hypo risk, not a theoretical one in c/t2dglp1 · 10 points · 1 days ago
glycaemic control first, that is the original indication
comment on [Caution] stacking with a sulfonylurea is a real hypo risk, not a theoretical one in c/t2dglp1 · 0 points · 1 days ago
A1c, CGM, stacking with metformin
comment on [Caution] stacking with a sulfonylurea is a real hypo risk, not a theoretical one in c/t2dglp1 · 0 points · 2 days ago
A1c, CGM, stacking with metformin
comment on [NHS] two years and four months on a tier 3 waiting list. timeline inside. in c/glp1uk · 54 points · 3 days ago
Which Boots location?
comment on [Method] the gradient everyone uses for sema and why it under-resolves the des-amido in c/hplc · 2 points · 4 days ago
Small correction: the trial was 4 weeks, not 13. Does not change your point but people will quote it.
comment on two labs, same vial, 98.1 and 96.4. both right? in c/hplc · 40 points · 7 days ago
the gradient is doing the separation work, not the column alone
comment on [Lab] LC-MS confirmed identity but the UV purity is 94%. now what in c/hplc · 97 points · 16 days ago
Did they post the raw trace or just the summary?
comment on [Question] what is a reasonable system suitability RSD for this work in c/hplc · -15 points · 17 days ago
axis labels included, always
comment on retention time shifted 0.4 min and nobody wants to talk about it in c/hplc · 15 points · 19 days ago
a round-robin on baseline integration would be genuinely useful
comment on integration vs method development — genuinely asking which matters more in c/hplc · 0 points · 24 days ago
Edit to your parent would help — the concentration you quoted assumes one scenario and you have written another above it.
comment on method development — 10 things I got wrong before I got it right in c/hplc · 6 points · 26 days ago
I am going to push back on this slightly.
comment on [Resolved] the QST batch dispute — vendor retested, numbers matched, my error in c/vendorvetting · 4 points · 29 days ago
one vendor per post, multi-vendor goes in the monthly thread
comment on someone explain chromatogram to me like I have not read a paper in years in c/hplc · 30 points · 1 months ago
This is the correct method framing. Column and gradient are load-bearing fields.
comment on [Vendor] MKM communication is slow but the material has been fine in c/vendorvetting · 2 points · 1 months ago
Not to be pedantic but Janoshik and VendorInvestigate are being used interchangeably and they are not interchangeable in real life.
comment on i keep a spreadsheet of every vendor claim and whether it survived contact with a lab in c/vendorvetting · 4 points · 1 months ago
Order date, product, and result, in that order please?
comment on does gradient actually matter or is it forum lore at this point in c/hplc · 15 points · 1 months ago
Strongly agree. Largest single impurity tells a different story than total purity.
comment on three years of HPLC threads, summarised so you do not have to read them in c/hplc · 13 points · 1 months ago
The PeptideMeter result being close to my own HPLC is the signal, not the absolute number. Both are right.
comment on three years of HPLC threads, summarised so you do not have to read them in c/hplc · 85 points · 1 months ago
Edit to your parent would help — the concentration you quoted assumes one scenario and you have written another above it.
comment on three years of HPLC threads, summarised so you do not have to read them in c/hplc · 129 points · 1 months ago
two labs, two different baselines, two different purity numbers, both honest
Yes, exactly this, and it is the bit that took me 79 weeks to accept.
comment on someone explain LC-MS to me like I have not read a paper in years in c/hplc · 1 points · 1 months ago
related substances are where the story lives, not the main peak
Adding to this: integration is doing more work than the comment implies.