Thursday, 30 July 2026, 14:22  ·  Welcome, Guest. Please log in or register.
PepsTalking BoardPeptides & GLP-1 · since March 2019
96,511 posts2,151 topics · 277 members

Should crowd ratings and lab results be combined?

Started by Pipette_Priya on 16 June 2020, 17:1985 replies52,000 viewsPage 6 of 9
WH
Whitlock
Board Founder
Administrator
Posts3,668
JoinedMar 2019
LocationBristol
Rep:
Founder — Opened the board in March 2019.Staff — Serves on the moderation team.Seven Years — Registered in 2019.Helping Hand — Cited by other members for patient answers.Bac Water Veteran — Posted in the Bac Water Wars of 2021.1,000 Posts — Rang the bell at one thousand.
Online
Re: Should crowd ratings and lab results be combined?« Reply #50 on: 18 October 2020, 15:55 »
Quote from: saline_sceptic on 9 October 2020, 04:39 » Reply #48
Quote from: clyde_gordon on 5 October 2020, 23:19 » Reply #47

Reading the collated results and the pattern of vendor consistency appears.…

The sample preparation is half the problem. Labs cannot fix bad handling.…

This board has a fairly settled answer to that and it is worth stating plainly. Four independent services get used by this board: Janoshik, Medu Laboratories, PeptideDetective and VendorInvestigator. That change is the biggest single improvement in this hobby in seven years.

Founder. Runs the board, not the vials.
Read the sticky. It is stickied for a reason.

QuoteReplyReportProfile
31 members found this useful
HB
Halvorsen_B
Peptides, Not Pens
Moderator
Posts1,303
JoinedOct 2020
LocationBergen
Rep:
Staff — Serves on the moderation team.Six Years — Registered in 2020.Bench Award — Contributions to the Lab Bench boards.Bac Water Veteran — Posted in the Bac Water Wars of 2021.1,000 Posts — Rang the bell at one thousand.
Offline
Re: Should crowd ratings and lab results be combined?« Reply #51 on: 23 October 2020, 16:25 »

reply #48 answers the question asked. Mine is slightly different.

I have a slightly different experience and I do not think it contradicts anybody. The cost of a submission has fallen enough since 2019 that testing has gone from a novelty to a norm here. Twice, then post. Worth searching the board before you take my word for it.

This board existed before GLP-1s. Ask me about 2019 sometime; bring a chair.

QuoteReplyReportProfile
15 members found this useful
MA
Marchmont
Board Archivist
Moderator
Posts2,136
JoinedMay 2019
LocationEdinburgh
Rep:
Staff — Serves on the moderation team.Seven Years — Registered in 2019.Archivist — Keeps the old boards intact.Thread Necromancer — Bumps threads on their anniversary, with intent.1,000 Posts — Rang the bell at one thousand.
Offline
Re: Should crowd ratings and lab results be combined?« Reply #52 on: 28 October 2020, 02:12 »

Post the whole report if you can.

"The archive is the only part of a forum that appreciates in value."
Merged, moved, or locked by me? There will be a note. There is always a note.

QuoteReplyReportProfile
28 members found this useful
PP
PeptidePeteUK
Keeper of the Vendor Files
Moderator
Posts2,479
JoinedNov 2019
LocationPortsmouth
Rep:
Staff — Serves on the moderation team.Seven Years — Registered in 2019.Sourcing Award — Sustained evidence-backed vendor reporting.Helping Hand — Cited by other members for patient answers.1,000 Posts — Rang the bell at one thousand.
Offline
Re: Should crowd ratings and lab results be combined?« Reply #53 on: 31 October 2020, 21:16 »

The two-lab disagreement in post three is worth understanding.

No report, no claim. Post the COA or post nothing.
Vendor files: /vendors/ — corrections welcome, opinions optional.

QuoteReplyReportProfile
12 members found this useful
Moved topic
This post was removed by a moderator. It contained a detail this board does not permit anywhere — see the rules. Reply #55, posted 8 November 2020, 21:22. Nothing else in the topic was affected.
FS
FridgeShelfFred
Keeper of the Fridge Thread
Sr. Member
Posts1,121
JoinedNov 2019
LocationStoke-on-Trent
Rep:
Seven Years — Registered in 2019.Lounge Fixture — Long service in the Lounge.Annual Tradition — Runs one of the board traditions.1,000 Posts — Rang the bell at one thousand.
Offline
Re: Should crowd ratings and lab results be combined?« Reply #56 on: 15 November 2020, 18:01 »
Quote from: Pipette_Priya on 16 June 2020, 17:19 » the opening post

Straight to it. Should crowd ratings and lab results be combined? Collated results, updated. Every row is a member submission with a…

Quote from: Wolds_Walker on 1 November 2020, 10:00 » Reply #54

The mean purity is the summary but the range is what actually matters.…

Short answer first, then the reasoning, because I know how this board reads. A result that surprises you is worth repeating before it is worth publishing. It removes an argument you would otherwise have to have with yourself. Happy to be told I have got that wrong.

The Annual Fridge Photo Thread — every December since 2019. Butter compartment, no judgement.
Stoke. Second shelf.

QuoteReplyReportProfile
22 members found this useful
NL
NorthernLass74
Firm But Fond
Global Moderator
Posts3,031
JoinedJun 2019
LocationHarrogate
Rep:
Staff — Serves on the moderation team.Seven Years — Registered in 2019.Helping Hand — Cited by other members for patient answers.Bac Water Veteran — Posted in the Bac Water Wars of 2021.1,000 Posts — Rang the bell at one thousand.
Offline
Re: Should crowd ratings and lab results be combined?« Reply #57 on: 21 November 2020, 23:57 »
Quote from: FridgeShelfFred on 15 November 2020, 18:01 » Reply #56

Short answer first, then the reasoning, because I know how this board reads. A result that surprises you is worth repeating before i…

The comparison of services is useful for budget and waiting time.

« Last Edit: 22 November 2020, 02:58 by NorthernLass74 »

Play nicely. I have a spreadsheet and I am not afraid to use it.
— Lass

QuoteReplyReportProfile
6 members found this useful
WW
Wolds_Walker
Board Elder
Full Member
Posts723
JoinedJun 2020
LocationLouth
Rep:
Six Years — Registered in 2020.
Offline
Re: Should crowd ratings and lab results be combined?« Reply #58 on: 24 November 2020, 23:33 »

My result came back in the expected range with full method documentation.

« Last Edit: 25 November 2020, 04:10 by Wolds_Walker »

14,000 steps today. Nobody asked. Posting it anyway.
Louth, Lincs.

QuoteReplyReportProfile
19 members found this useful
PP
PeptidePeteUK
Keeper of the Vendor Files
Moderator
Posts2,479
JoinedNov 2019
LocationPortsmouth
Rep:
Staff — Serves on the moderation team.Seven Years — Registered in 2019.Sourcing Award — Sustained evidence-backed vendor reporting.Helping Hand — Cited by other members for patient answers.1,000 Posts — Rang the bell at one thousand.
Offline
Re: Should crowd ratings and lab results be combined?« Reply #59 on: 27 November 2020, 08:26 »
Quote from: FridgeShelfFred on 15 November 2020, 18:01 » Reply #56

Short answer first, then the reasoning, because I know how this board reads. A result that surprises you is worth repeating before i…

Nothing heavy, just a clarification from the mod side. A single result is a fact about one vial; a run of results is a fact about a process. A log that only records good news is an advert.

No report, no claim. Post the COA or post nothing.
Vendor files: /vendors/ — corrections welcome, opinions optional.

QuoteReplyReportProfile
3 members found this useful

Users viewing this topic: Ian97 and 6 guests.

Similar topics

from Verification & Testing Log
SubjectStarted byRepliesViewsLast post
Collated results by supplier — 2026 tableSevernQuentin8024,62529 July 2026
Submitting anonymouslycold_pack_carl164,4189 June 2024
VendorInvestigator verification — what it covers (collated)FridgeShelfFred3829,20123 March 2020
Test results this board did not expectNorthernLass744418,48125 May 2025
Paying for your own test in 2019 — a historical note (collated)VialVeteran1410,00123 June 2022