A certificate whose chromatogram axes do not match its stated method — one year on

A certificate whose chromatogram axes do not match its stated method — one year on Writing it up because I had to work it out twice and would rather nobody else did.

Posting a small dataset on certificate whose chromatogram axes. It is mine, it is uncontrolled, and the method is stated so it can be discounted appropriately.

What I would like is not agreement but a second dataset collected by someone with no stake in mine. If one exists I would rather read it than argue for this one.

Testimonials without a lot, a date, a method or a service are not evidence and are not a red flag either. They are simply not evidence.

If it helps: the failure mode here is usually boring rather than dramatic.

This settles it for me, at least until somebody posts a reason it should not.

Taking post #64 at face value and following it one step further.

Pressure to pay outside a normal channel is the practical warning that has nothing to do with chemistry and is the one people ask about least.

That is consistent with mine, for whatever one more account is worth.

Noted, and I have changed what I was going to do on the strength of it.

Where the same certificate image appears with different lot numbers, that is a documentation finding worth reporting with the images attached.

I would want the raw data before agreeing with my own summary of it.

The guidelines draw that line for a practical reason as much as a fair one: reports accumulate into something useful and allegations do not.

That is what I would do. It may not be what is correct.