🍪 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 TestingCommunity-funded testing initiative — 6 month update Page 2

Community-funded testing initiative — 6 month update

A1cHero_PHX Tue, Nov 25, 2025 at 8:57 PM 12 replies 1,137 viewsPage 2 of 3
JennaRN
Senior Member
1,987
8,923
Mar 2024
Colorado
Online
Nov 26, 2025 at 4:25 AM#6
MikeFit_NJ said:
Inter-laboratory variation comes from real methodological differences, not sloppiness: which reference standard was used and how it was itself…

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.

25 20Dr.KarenChen, Dr.NateNeph, PharmD_Rodriguez and 22 others
Reply Quote Save Share Report
josh_phd_bmore
Member
389
1,678
Jul 2024
Baltimore, MD
Nov 26, 2025 at 7:21 AM#7
A1cHero_PHX 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…

Community-verified vendors for certificates of analysis: I maintain a spreadsheet of Janoshik-verified test results submitted by community members. Across 52 submitted tests:

  • 85% tested at ≥98% purity
  • 10% tested at 95-98% purity
  • 5% tested at <95% purity (concerning)

The vendors with consistently high purity results are listed in the Vendor Directory. We update monthly based on new community submissions.

24 19Dr.ObesityLA, NurseKim_ATL, paul_denver and 21 others
Reply Quote Save Share Report
Dr.RheumBOS
Member
567
2,345
Apr 2024
Boston, MA
Nov 26, 2025 at 10:17 AM#8
JennaRN said:
I am more sceptical of certificates as a category than this thread is.

My HPLC chromatogram analysis for certificates of analysis — I sent my batch to Janoshik and here's what the results showed:

Main peak retention time: 14.5 minutes (consistent with semaglutide reference standard)
Peak purity: 99.3%
Related substances: 0.6% (single impurity at 8.7 minutes — likely a synthesis intermediate)
Mass spec: m/z 4113.58 (matches expected molecular weight)

This is a clean result. The mass spec confirmation is particularly important — it proves the molecule is actually semaglutide and not a substitution.

23 18cory_ATX, lori_vegas, Dr.PulmRoch and 20 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
adam_van
Member
212
890
Nov 2024
Vancouver, CA
Nov 26, 2025 at 1:13 PM#9

A narrower follow-up, since the general answer is now clear:

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

22 17tommy_boulder, hyun_seoul, jim_asheville and 19 others
Reply Quote Save Share Report
A1cHero_PHX
Member
523
2,678
Jul 2024
Phoenix, AZ
Nov 27, 2025 at 3:17 AM#10

Closing the loop on my own question.

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.

Last edited: Nov 27, 2025 at 8:17 AM
44 17jason_sac26, chris_chi24, tampaLisa73 and 41 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