Chain of custody: difference between revisions
Diff·revision 15 → 16·06:15, 14 Mar 2025
Difference between revision 15 and revision 16 of Chain of custody. 2 lines changed; the page grew by 169 bytes.
| Revision 15 — 08:03, 25 Feb 2025 ArchiveBot (talk) bot: sort category members 3,916 bytes ±0 | Revision 16 — 06:15, 14 Mar 2025 API_Aurora (talk) clarify that a certificate is a claim by its issuer 4,085 bytes +169 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 25 | The consequences run in both directions and are not symmetric in the way people usually assume. Degradation in transit or storage produces a result worse than the material as shipped, so an unfavourable result from an uncontrolled chain is weak evidence against a supplier. A favourable result is less affected, since degradation does not improve purity — but it says nothing about whether that vial was representative. | 25 | The consequences run in both directions and are not symmetric in the way people usually assume. Degradation in transit or storage produces a result worse than the material as shipped, so an unfavourable result from an uncontrolled chain is weak evidence against a supplier. A favourable result is less affected, since degradation does not improve purity — but it says nothing about whether that vial was representative. |
| 26 | 26 | ||
| + | 27 | The practical upshot is that uncontrolled-chain results are more informative when favourable than when unfavourable, which is the reverse of how they are usually read. | |
| + | 28 | ||
| 27 | == References == | 29 | == References == |
| 28 | {{reflist}} | 30 | {{reflist}} |