Six words a verification badge would need to mean anything
A badge asserts that something was tested. It does not assert what, when, on whose sample, by what method, or whether the lot on sale is the lot that was tested.
VendorInvestigate
Page 2 of 6 of this archive, newest first.
We split six vials four ways and posted them
Two years ago we ran an anonymised version of this comparison and promised a named one. This is it, with every method printed in full.
Same material, different gradients, different answers
The Journal submitted split samples from single lots to three assay services, under names unconnected to this publication, and published each method alongside each result.
The badge is about a sample. The listing is about a product.
Every step between the laboratory report and the product page removes information, and the badge is the last step.
Reproducibility, measured rather than assumed
The Journal submitted split samples from single lots to three assay services, under names unconnected to this publication, and published each method alongside each result.
Blind duplicates: what happens when a laboratory does not know it is being watched
Duplicate submissions under different names test within-laboratory repeatability, which is a different quantity from between-laboratory reproducibility.
Reproducibility, measured rather than assumed
Two years ago we ran an anonymised version of this comparison and promised a named one. This is it, with every method printed in full.
How a claim degrades between the bench and the listing
The Journal does not treat a badge as evidence and states so wherever it reports one.
How a claim degrades between the bench and the listing
The Journal does not treat a badge as evidence and states so wherever it reports one.
The badge economy, and what it is actually certifying
A badge asserts that something was tested. It does not assert what, when, on whose sample, by what method, or whether the lot on sale is the lot that was tested.
Six words a verification badge would need to mean anything
Lot-level verification with a public report is a real and achievable thing. It exists in this market, on a minority of listings.
Six words a verification badge would need to mean anything
The Journal does not treat a badge as evidence and states so wherever it reports one.
What a laboratory knows about the material it receives
The condition on arrival is recorded by some services and not others, and it is one of the more informative lines in a report.
We split six vials four ways and posted them
Two years ago we ran an anonymised version of this comparison and promised a named one. This is it, with every method printed in full.
What a split-sample exercise can establish, and what it cannot
The Journal submitted split samples from single lots to three assay services, under names unconnected to this publication, and published each method alongside each result.
Custody, condition and the temperature nobody logged
What a laboratory can and cannot know about the provenance, storage history and representativeness of what lands on its bench.
Custody, condition and the temperature nobody logged
The condition on arrival is recorded by some services and not others, and it is one of the more informative lines in a report.
Six words a verification badge would need to mean anything
What a verification mark would have to carry to be checkable: a date, a lot, a method, a submitter and a link to the report.
How a claim degrades between the bench and the listing
Every step between the laboratory report and the product page removes information, and the badge is the last step.
The submitted sample: the weakest link in the whole system
Every third-party report in this market describes a sample somebody chose to send. That choice is outside the laboratory’s control and outside its records.