anders_CPH said:It helps to say which part of this you are uncertain about.
Agreed on the substance. I would put less weight on the timescale, because two months of anything is not enough to distinguish a trend from a wobble.
anders_CPH said:It helps to say which part of this you are uncertain about.
Agreed on the substance. I would put less weight on the timescale, because two months of anything is not enough to distinguish a trend from a wobble.
Reprising the part of this that the last few posts have moved away from:
I disagree that testing history is decisive. It tells you what a supplier did when they were being watched. Continuity of behaviour under stress — a late shipment, a failed test, a complaint — is more predictive than any run of good results.
Happy to go further on any of that.
Trusted third-party HPLC & mass spectrometry analysis. Verify peptide purity with the lab the community relies on. Independent. Accurate. Transparent.
Verify Your PeptidesEst. 1998. The synthesis house behind the vials you send for testing. ISO 9001 and cGMP certified, 1,500+ staff, batch-specific COA with every order.
Browse GL BiochemMASHdoc_SA said:I disagree that testing history is decisive.
Adding a me-too, because a thread of one person's experience is not much use.
MASHdoc_SA said:I disagree that testing history is decisive.
Coming back to something from earlier in the thread, because it keeps being talked past:
Update: the thing I was blaming turned out not to be the cause. Leaving the original post as written rather than editing it, so the mistake stays visible for whoever searches this next.