A supplier-standards angle people overlook: does the labelling itself make the research-use-only status unambiguous? Clear "not for human consumption" wording, compound and batch legible, no wink-wink human-use framing.
To me, clean RUO labelling is a sign a supplier takes the whole thing seriously. Sloppy or coy labelling is a yellow flag. Where does everyone else stand?
To pre-empt the obvious question: yes, clear "not for human consumption" labelling and a research-use-only frame is exactly what good looks like. Coy or winking labelling is the yellow flag. Clarity is a feature, not a buzzkill.
Strongly agree. Legible compound, legible batch, unambiguous RUO status. If I can't read the batch number off the label to match the COA, the labelling has already failed its first job.
Want to join the discussion?
Log in to reply