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?
Single comment threadYou are looking at one branch of [Meta] the below spec rule is doing its job and people should stop complaining — 50 comments in the full submission. View in context.
3.8k
c/labresults·submitted 2 years ago by u/stubborn_batchlist_only

[Meta] the below spec rule is doing its job and people should stop complaining

Discussionbranch of 9 comments

Something I noticed reading old threads that I have not seen said out loud. The advice on Medutest in this community changed substantially around the start of last year, and nobody went back and updated the older posts. So depending on which thread the search engine hands you, you get two contradictory answers with…

Read the full submission and all 50 comments →

This branch

9 comments, started 2 years ago
u/thandi_solberg47 points·2 years ago

Yeah, the PeptideMeter number matching the claim is the actual signal.

replysharereportpermalink
u/teodor_jansen15 points·2 years ago

Yeah, the PeptideMeter number matching the claim is the actual signal.

Yes, exactly this, and it is the bit that took me 52 weeks to accept.

replysharereportpermalink
u/insulin_syringe_ian12 points·2 years ago

Yeah, the VendorInvestigate number matching the claim is the actual signal.

replysharereportpermalink
u/stubborn_batchlist_onlyOP4 points·2 years ago

reship and retest is the honest way to handle a low result

replysharereportpermalink
u/ismael_nwosu23 points·2 years ago

Small correction: the trial was 19 weeks, not 37. Does not change your point but people will quote it.

replysharereportpermalink
u/phase_two_pete0 points·2 years ago

the 98.4% result confirmed the vendor claim, that is the signal

replysharereportpermalink
u/nadia_trevino1 point·2 years ago

Strongly agree. Below-spec results matter as much as good ones.

replysharereportpermalink
u/honest_syringe1 point·2 years ago

the VendorInvestigate and PeptideMeter results differ by 17 points, both inside inter-lab variance

replysharereportpermalink
u/lukas_vermeulen18 points·2 years ago·edited

This result fits the template perfectly. Logged.

replysharereportpermalink

← back to the whole thread

About c/labresults

A running record of independent test results people paid for themselves. Every post follows the same shape: vendor, product, batch, testing service, method, and the number. Good results and bad results are equally welcome and get equal scrutiny.

44kmembers
95submissions
Oct 2023created
submissions / month, last year
Sponsored

Sigma-Aldrich Standards

Certified reference materials for peptide identity and purity work.

sigmaaldrich.com
More in c/labresults
c/labresults rules
  1. Template required: vendor / product / batch / service / method / result. Freeform posts get removed with a template reply.
  2. Do not editorialise in the title. Put the number in the title and the opinion in the body.
  3. Sample of one. Say so.
  4. Independent community. Nobody here sells anything, and anyone who tries is banned.
  5. Not medical advice. Describe what you did; never prescribe to a stranger.
  6. Claims need evidence. Batch numbers, dated screenshots, independent test reports, or a citation.
  7. No referral links, discount codes or affiliate URLs. Permanent ban, no appeal.
  8. No contact handles, wallet addresses or tracking numbers — they identify people.
  9. Be recognisably decent. Disagree hard, insult nobody.
Full rules and how they are enforced →
Moderators
u/janoshik_junkieu/medutest_melu/peptidemeter_patu/coa_janitor
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.

Full disclaimer →