[Discussion] we are measuring water content at the wrong time and calling it noise
I have had 13 orders now and I keep a table, so here is the honest summary rather than a vibe.
Material has been consistent. Communication has not. Shipping has varied by about 28 days on nominally the same lane, which matters more in summer than in February.
The independent number came back 98.4% against a claimed 98.6%, which I read as agreement rather than a discrepancy — inter-lab variance on this assay is a point or two either way and treating one lab as ground truth is how people end up in pointless arguments with vendors.
Batch number is in the comments. Ask if you want the method.
best — the order this archive was captured in
Strongly agree. Mass% and area% are answering different questions on the same document.
Did they give you the chromatogram or just the summary line?
What is the method line say? Not the technique, the actual method.
PDF metadata is checkable in fifteen seconds
PDF metadata is checkable in fifteen seconds
Adding to this: COA is doing more work than the comment implies.
the batch number or it did not happen
[removed by moderator]
Sent one vial to Janoshik and VendorInvestigate. 97.4% and 97.2%. Cost me more than the vial did and I would do it again.
Titration speed is a side-effect dial far more than an efficacy dial.
redact your own name, not the vendor's batch details
Asked BCH for the batch-specific COA and they sent it within six hours, full document, batch number, date, everything. That is the baseline.
Asked BCH for the batch-specific COA and they sent it within six hours, full document, batch number, date, everything.
Disagree on that part. 98.7% and 96.2% on the same vial is normal.
no "is this good?" without saying what the compound and claimed purity are
the batch number or it did not happen
Respectfully this is a sample of one presented as a finding.
Respectfully this is a sample of one presented as a finding.
Counter-anecdote: opposite result, same dose. Which mostly tells us the variance is huge.
Strongly agree. Mass% and area% are answering different questions on the same document.
This is the correct framing. The COA structure matters as much as the number.
PDF metadata is checkable in fifteen seconds
Batch number and date of analysis? Both are load-bearing.
PDF metadata is checkable in fifteen seconds
Disagree on that part. 97.9% and 97.6% on the same vial is normal.
- 1What is the method line say? Not the technique, the actual method.6 comments in this branch · started by u/nadia_fonseca
- 2Titration speed is a side-effect dial far more than an efficacy dial.5 comments in this branch · started by u/cesar_ivaturi