[Discussion] the purity advice in here is 2 years out of date
the purity advice in here is 2 years out of date. Making the case below, and I expect to lose some of it in the comments. Pulling the figures out of the title: 2 years. All of it is written down as it happened rather than reconstructed. Inter-lab variance on this assay runs roughly a point either way, driven mostly…
one result is a data point, agreement between two services is evidence
area percent unless the report says otherwise
What was the claim on the certificate you are comparing against?
the log is cumulative, that is the whole value of it
Kept every report as a PDF with the batch in the filename. Two years in, it is the most useful folder I own.
That reading assumes area percent and net peptide content are the same number. They are not, and the report says which it is.
area percent unless the report says otherwise
Adding the boring but useful bit: say whether you paid for it. It is the basis of the whole log.
That service reports area percent by default. Worth stating, since the thread has been comparing it to a mass figure.
a result with no batch number is about a vial nobody can identify
results without method are gossip with decimals
Retitled — the original stated a discrepancy the numbers do not show.