On the opening post — agreed on the reasoning, with one qualification.
The most useful thing anyone has posted about field-by-field walk through a certificate in this category was a table of what had been measured and by whom. That is what I would want again.
Adding a data point of agreement rather than a data point.
Post #22 is right about the mechanism and I think understates the practical bit.
A certificate is a statement by its issuer that a defined test was performed on a defined lot and produced a defined result. That is all it is, and it is not nothing.
I am confident about the direction and much less about the magnitude.
Reporting rather than recommending, on field-by-field walk through a certificate. What happened is above. Whether it should have is a different question and not one I am qualified to answer.
Where I part company with post #49, and it is a narrow parting.
The number people quote for field-by-field walk through a certificate is a central estimate presented without its interval, and the interval is wide enough that the estimate is nearly uninformative on its own.
Post #57 is right about the mechanism and I think understates the practical bit.
A chromatogram supplied as a small image is legible for peak shape and not for baseline detail. That is enough to sanity-check an integration and not enough to reproduce it.
It is worth stating the boring hypothesis before the interesting one.
An itemised related-substances table with retention times says considerably more about the synthesis than a single total. A total tells you how much is not the main peak and nothing about what it is.
I looked this up rather than remembered it, which is the right order.
Worth separating two things that post #114 runs together.
"Not less than 98 per cent" is a specification. "98.3 per cent" is a result. A certificate carrying only the first has not told you what was measured.
Read the full topic (148 posts)
| Topic | Participants | Replies | Views | Activity |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Coming back to: Purity assay versus content assay: two different numbers
Purity assay versus content assay: two different numbers — setting out what I have, and where I think it stops being reliable. Asking about Purity assay versus content assay directly, because I have read four…
|
+71 | 77 | 31k | 23mo |
|
Revisiting: A field-by-field walk through a certificate of analysis
Revisiting: A field-by-field walk through a certificate of analysis Writing it up because I had to work it out twice and would rather nobody else did. I would like to disagree carefully with the settled view…
|
+37 | 41 | 656 | 3mo |
|
When a tidy document is a signal and when it is decoration
When a tidy document is a signal and when it is decoration I have a specific reason for asking rather than idle curiosity, and the context is below. What changes if the standard account of tidy document is…
|
+6 | 10 | 20k | 10mo |
|
Which fields on a certificate actually matter, ranked
Which fields on a certificate actually matter, ranked — that is the question, and I have not found it answered plainly anywhere I have looked. I would like to understand what this number means before I repeat…
|
+25 | 29 | 46k | 4mo |
|
"Greater than or equal to 99%" as a specification rather than a result
"Greater than or equal to 99%" as a specification rather than a result Writing it up because I had to work it out twice and would rather nobody else did. Setting out an integration problem with the actual…
|
+132 | 146 | 47k | 5mo |
| Topic | Participants | Replies | Views | Activity |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Counter-ion form: the field almost nobody reports — one year on
On the subject in the title: Counter-ion form: the field almost nobody reports — one year on Working notes rather than a conclusion. The question about Counter-ion form that I actually want answered is the…
|
+121 | 139 | 31k | 16mo |
|
What a certificate commits its issuer to — one year on
What a certificate commits its issuer to — one year on — that is the question, and I have not found it answered plainly anywhere I have looked. A documentation question rather than an analytical one. I have a…
|
+107 | 117 | 6.5k | 1d |
|
What I would want from a home test that does not exist yet
The question in the title: What I would want from a home test that does not exist yet I will give what I have already checked below so nobody repeats it. Two reports on the same lot, and I would like help…
|
+46 | 50 | 8k | 6h |
|
Counter-ion form: the field almost nobody reports
Counter-ion form: the field almost nobody reports Writing it up because I had to work it out twice and would rather nobody else did. Counter-ion form, from the point of view of someone who has read the…
|
3 | 11k | 2mo | |
|
A supplier that answers analytical questions with restated claims
On the subject in the title: A supplier that answers analytical questions with restated claims Working notes rather than a conclusion. Reading back through what has been written here about supplier, three…
|
+107 | 118 | 45k | 12mo |