Save your unusable raws Guaranteed.

[BigTomJ]

It look like 3 labs disagree with jano

Except when analiza got the entire compound wrong on multiple occasions

 

[Photon]

It look like 3 labs disagree with jano

I did send my raws in and got the same results @ Jano.

So where does the 10% difference come from?

 

[Thorshammer]

I did send my raws in and got the same results @ Jano.

So where does the 10% difference come from?

Was the impurity identified or still unknown.

 

[Thorshammer]

I did send my raws in and got the same results @ Jano.

So where does the 10% difference come from?

Was the impurity identi

Except when analiza got the entire compound wrong on multiple occasions

Thats possible on several steroid esters being extremely similar. The wavelength they absorb inis identical and everything is dependant on very similar retention times in the stationary phase.

 

[Walter Hype]

After i build calibration curves for my entire list I planned on offering free testing for a while just to build reps and experience. Preferably for people also sending it out so I can compare my results accuracy . I've only had this for about 6 months and just starting to get really comfortable.

Ebay from a refurbishing dealer with a 1 year warranty with the software permanently installed on a Lenovo laptop. And you really don't need one this fancy for what we test. The biggest part was studying analytical chemistry enough to use it. I'm actually looking into a used Agilant 1200 series HPLC

All support hope you get really good at it hahah. It's cool your doing it in the first place.

 

[Thorshammer]

All support hope you get really good at it hahah. It's cool your doing it in the first place.

Got tired of relying on questionable test results and uncertainty that could easily destroy my reputation.

 

[Walter Hype]

I did send my raws in and got the same results @ Jano.

So where does the 10% difference come from?

Iv noticed mz takes a few variance and avgs it out. Is there a chance jano plugs in the first result he gets rather than take many versions of the same sample? Therefore explaining the difference? Obviously that would explain the swing if that's the case

 

[Photon]

Was the impurity identified or still unknown.

There's no way to ever identify it

 

[Photon]

Iv noticed mz takes a few variance and avgs it out. Is there a chance jano plugs in the first result he gets rather than take many versions of the same sample? Therefore explaining the difference? Obviously that would explain the swing if that's the case

Repeated testing should be within 2% or something, i think it was asked before

 

[Walter Hype]

Got tired of relying on questionable test results and uncertainty that could easily destroy my reputation.

That's exactly what I'm saying! God knows what's going on. Plus I want better than 5% variance! How the heck can we get to 99% pure raws on paper if the variance is large enough to never pinpoint it? Honestly this entire thread is too far advanced for most ugl. The things we are trying to do will never be reflected as it should with the current testing we have at our disposal. Only good enough. But this isn't about good enough is it? Not to me.

 

[Thorshammer]

There's no way to ever identify it

He should have had two seperate peaks on the chromatogram and if the second didn't match any known RT/AU then take the fraction and use NMR.

 

[Thorshammer]

That's exactly what I'm saying! God knows what's going on. Plus I want better than 5% variance! How the heck can we get to 99% pure raws on paper if the variance is large enough to never pinpoint it? Honestly this entire thread is too far advanced for most ugl. The things we are trying to do will never be reflected as it should with the current testing we have at our disposal. Only good enough. But this isn't about good enough is it? Not to me.

A tiny bubble in a pipette tip or slightly over the meniscus line on the solution or bad calibration on your balance all can throw quanative results off a lot.

 

[Thorshammer]

Fuck moisture can be a huge factor are the using KF on samples all these variable have huge impacts

 

[Walter Hype]

Repeated testing should be within 2% or something, i think it was asked before

That large of a swing here is concerning. I would trust janos result over the rest only due to his long term reputation. I still would like to understand how one lab can test so different. There has to be a user error. It happens. Human error is not impossible.

 

[Walter Hype]

A tiny bubble in a pipette tip or slightly over the meniscus line on the solution or bad calibration on your balance all can throw quanative results off a lot.

Figures as much. So it's user error. Can't fault anyone for not being perfect and good enough works. But maybe we can get better ....or figure it out as a collective. I like when people come together for a common goal ....

 

[Photon]

That large of a swing here is concerning. I would trust janos result over the rest only due to his long term reputation. I still would like to understand how one lab can test so different. There has to be a user error. It happens. Human error is not impossible.

We've got 2 Jano testing (One vendor, one mine) with the same result.
I doubt human error is present.

Jano 2 test ~85
AB 2 test ~93
MZ 1 test ~95

 

[Thorshammer]

That large of a swing here is concerning. I would trust janos result over the rest only due to his long term reputation. I still would like to understand how one lab can test so different. There has to be a user error. It happens. Human error is not impossible.

Yes but if 3 say different a retest is mandatory just using credibility to say everyone else is wrong is not science it's dogma and should be retested.

 

[Thorshammer]

We've got 2 Jano testing (One vendor, one mine) with the same result.
I doubt human error is present.

Jano 2 test ~85
AB 2 test ~93
MZ 1 test ~95

That just means he got the same results twice doesn't mean he was right twice and everyone else is wrong. His standard could be off.

 

[Thorshammer]

Again im not critiquing anyone im only applying logic with zero bias.

 

[Walter Hype]

Again im not critiquing anyone im only applying logic with zero bias.

Nothing wrong with questioning either.

There's a lot of unknowns in this space