[Vendor] WXT order #21 — France, 39 days, no drama, receipts inside
Quick one. Canada here.
below spec works very differently where I live than in the threads that dominate the front page, and I keep seeing people confidently given advice that simply does not apply outside the US.
Specifics: the route I used took 11 weeks and cost roughly what I expected. The admin was worse than the cost. The thing that would have saved me the most time was knowing which document to ask for at the start.
Happy to answer questions from anyone in the same jurisdiction.
best — the order this archive was captured in
This result fits the template perfectly. Logged.
The VendorInvestigate result at 94.2% was below the 95.1% claim. GL Biochem retested at their cost and came back 94.2%. Logged as resolved.
below-spec results get logged, not dismissed
testing the vendor claim versus testing your actual vial are two different posts
Sceptical. If this were true we would see it reflected in the data and we do not.
sample of one, say so
the VendorInvestigate and PeptideMeter results differ by 24 points, both inside inter-lab variance
CPC claimed 97.6%, Janoshik came back 97.2%. 20 points is inter-lab variance, no drama.
Yeah, the Medutest number matching the claim is the actual signal.
multiple batches from WWB show a spread, that is the data
Tested 16 batches from WWB over 76 weeks. Spread was 99.2% to 99.1, mostly 99.2. Consistent vendor.
Strongly agree. Below-spec results matter as much as good ones.
Is that 99.0% area or mass?
Is that 99.0% area or mass?
Adding to this: Janoshik is doing more work than the comment implies.
below-spec results get logged, not dismissed
the 99.0% result confirmed the vendor claim, that is the signal
sample of one, say so
sample of one, say so
Yes, exactly this, and it is the bit that took me 56 weeks to accept.
do not editorialise in the title, put the number in the title and the opinion in the body
the Medutest and PeptideMeter results differ by 6 points, both inside inter-lab variance
[deleted]
the 99.2% result confirmed the vendor claim, that is the signal
No. This is the kind of confident post that gets copied into a screenshot and repeated for years. Where is the evidence.
Removed a chain here. The rule is one line long and it is not negotiable.
My Janoshik result matched the vendor COA exactly, which is rare. BCH deserves that note in the directory.
Not convinced. The evidence does not support that reading.
do not editorialise in the title, put the number in the title and the opinion in the body
do not editorialise in the title, put the number in the title and the opinion in the body
Counter-anecdote: opposite result, same dose. Which mostly tells us the variance is huge.
below-spec results get logged, not dismissed
You have restated the marketing copy. What is the actual substance here.
- 1the 99.0% result confirmed the vendor claim, that is the signal8 comments in this branch · started by u/milan_villalobos
- 2This result fits the template perfectly. Logged.7 comments in this branch · started by u/elise_ramos