🍪 CompoundTalk uses cookies to improve your experience, analyze traffic, and personalize content. By continuing to use this site, you agree to our Cookie Policy.
Evidence-based GLP-1 & peptide discussion since 2023
ForumsCOA & Analytical TestingBatch-to-batch purity variation — looking for input Page 2

Batch-to-batch purity variation — looking for input

dan_philly Mon, Apr 13, 2026 at 5:03 AM 12 replies 680 viewsPage 2 of 3
Dr.AddMedPHL
Senior Member
1,234
6,234
Mar 2024
Philadelphia, PA
Apr 14, 2026 at 12:20 AM#6
RetaRick_CA said:
The provenance questions are more useful than the numbers.

I am more sceptical of certificates as a category than this thread is. The document tells you about a sample somebody chose to send, at a moment in time, and nothing about the vial in your hand. Independent purchase-and-test is a different quality of evidence and everything else is inference.

I would rather be corrected than agreed with, if it comes to it.

46 16FitDadDave, RunnerRach, TrialNerd_Beth and 43 others
Reply Quote Save Share Report
jason_paloalto
Member
212
890
Nov 2024
Palo Alto, CA
Apr 14, 2026 at 8:00 AM#7
dan_philly said:
I have a certificate reporting 99.2% purity and 6.1mg content on a vial sold as 5mg, and I cannot work out whether those two numbers are consistent or…

Vendor quality matters when discussing certificates of analysis. I've tested my last 3 batches through Janoshik and purity has ranged from 97.0% to 99.4%. Consistency is key.

For anyone new: always request the COA, and consider independent verification. The $300 for a Janoshik test is worth the peace of mind.

Last edited: Apr 14, 2026 at 1:00 PM
45 15Dr.PathRoch, mona_PHX, andrew_nyc and 42 others
Reply Quote Save Share Report
Dr.ObesityMed
VIP Member
3,456
19,234
Nov 2023
Denver, CO
Online
Apr 14, 2026 at 3:40 PM#8
Dr.AddMedPHL said:
I am more sceptical of certificates as a category than this thread is.

COA red flags for certificates of analysis — here's what to look for when reviewing a Certificate of Analysis:

  • No HPLC data: If there's no chromatography graph, it's not a real COA
  • Exact 100% purity: Suspicious — real testing always shows slight variation
  • No batch number: Can't trace back to specific production
  • No endotoxin testing: For injectables, this is essential
  • Template looks like it was made in Word: Professional labs have standardized formats

I have seen fake COAs that are literally photoshopped. Always verify independently if possible.

44 14SurmountFan_IN, PeptideChemSF, A1cHero_PHX and 41 others
Reply Quote Save Share Report

Sigma-Aldrich — Research-Grade Standards

Certified reference materials, analytical reagents, and research-grade standards for peptide verification. Trusted by laboratories worldwide.

Shop Reference Standards
MASHdoc_SA
Member
456
2,345
Aug 2024
San Antonio, TX
Apr 14, 2026 at 11:19 PM#9

Following on from SarahChen_PharmD — and this may be the naive question:

Why two laboratories report different purity for the same batch, and which number to believe?

43 13LabKate, kate.chem, DataDave and 40 others
Reply Quote Save Share Report
dan_philly
Member
456
2,123
Jul 2024
Philadelphia, PA
Apr 16, 2026 at 12:04 PM#10

Reporting back.

Purity and content being different measurements was the piece I was missing. The vial was overfilled and pure, which is a very different problem from the one I thought I had.

43 16EndoResFellow, PharmacoVig_BOS, SurmountFan_IN and 40 others
Reply Quote Save Share Report

Similar Threads

HPLC vs UPLC for peptide purity — method comparison study18 replies
Mass spectrometry for peptide identity verification — ESI-MS guide7 replies
Endotoxin testing methods — LAL vs recombinant Factor C17 replies
Red flags on COAs — how to spot a fake certificate5 replies
USP reference standards for peptide verification — sourcing guide3 replies
ForumsNewTrendingMembersAccount

Log In

Forgot password?
No account? Register