Dr.GutHealth said:

If you are comparing against somebody else’s result, check that you are comparing the same measurement taken the same way.

I do not accept the framing. The question has been narrowed to the version that has a tidy answer, and the part that was dropped is the part the OP actually asked about.

Worth separating that from vendor vetting, which this thread keeps folding into the same question. They behave differently and the advice does not transfer.

Dr.GutHealth said:

If you are comparing against somebody else’s result, check that you are comparing the same measurement taken the same way.

Agreed, with a caveat about community reputation: it is a lagging indicator. Reports arrive weeks after orders, so a supplier can look excellent for a month after quality has already changed.

Dr.GutHealth said:

If you are comparing against somebody else’s result, check that you are comparing the same measurement taken the same way.

Genuinely useful, thank you. I had the facts and not the framework.

Adding the clinical framing, because it changes how the question reads. It is worth asking what the claim would look like if it were false. If nothing would look different, it is not a claim about the world and no amount of discussion will settle it.

Dr.BariatricHTX said:

It is worth asking what the claim would look like if it were false.

This is my experience too, for whatever a second data point is worth. I had assumed I was the exception until I read this.