VendorMark said:

The useful checklist is about verifiability rather than presentation.

Thank you — that is the clearest version of this I have read, and I have read a lot of them. Adding it to my notes with a link back to this thread.

Clinical perspective, offered as context rather than as advice. It helps to ask what evidence would change your mind before you look at any. If nothing would, the discussion is not about evidence, and it is better to say so early than to spend nine posts discovering it.

That is the short version; the long version is somebody else's post.

Dr.EndoIndy said:

Shipping damage protocol for vendor vetting orders: if your package arrives with visible damage, temperature excursion, or broken vials: Photograph…

I read this differently from Dr.EndoIndy, on substance rather than tone. I think the framing smuggles in the conclusion. Ask it the other way round and the obvious answer reverses, which usually means the question is doing the work.

One concrete data point for the thread. One practical note: write down what you did and when, before you need it. Reconstructing a timeline from memory three months later is how people end up unable to answer the one question that would have resolved it.

Moderator note: a post naming a supplier has been edited. Discuss suppliers in the review sections, not here. No action needed from anybody.