🍪 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 TestingCOA red flag compilation — what worked for you? Page 4

COA red flag compilation — what worked for you?

alex_tucson Wed, Sep 10, 2025 at 9:15 PM 20 replies 1,640 viewsPage 4 of 4
carlos_SATX
Member
245
1,123
Oct 2024
San Antonio, TX
Sep 13, 2025 at 11:45 PM#16
Dr.ObesityMed said:
Shipping damage protocol for vendor vetting orders: if your package arrives with visible damage, temperature excursion, or broken vials: Photograph…

Agreed, and mass spec answers a question purity does not: identity. High purity tells you one thing dominates the chromatogram, not that it is the molecule you ordered. A mass within about a dalton of expected is the identity check.

49 22james_edin, FranDenver, Dr.BariatricHTX and 46 others
Reply Quote Save Share Report
oliver_london
Member
312
1,345
Aug 2024
London, UK
Sep 14, 2025 at 10:08 AM#17
carlos_SATX said:
Agreed, and mass spec answers a question purity does not: identity.

This is my experience too, for whatever a second data point is worth.

50 23MikeNYC_runner and 47 others
Reply Quote Save Share Report
LindaRN_retired
Member
189
890
Dec 2024
Sarasota, FL
Sep 14, 2025 at 8:31 PM#18
carlos_SATX said:
Agreed, and mass spec answers a question purity does not: identity.

There is a second half to this that has not been said yet. The version of this that has an answer is narrower than the version being asked. Narrow it and it becomes tractable; leave it broad and the thread will produce nine confident and incompatible replies.

Last edited: Sep 14, 2025 at 11:31 PM
1 24amsterdam_pete
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
labquiet_amy
Senior Member
1,234
6,789
Mar 2024
Cambridge, MA
Sep 15, 2025 at 6:54 AM#19

One concrete data point for the thread. Keep the original post as written when you update it, and add the correction underneath. An edited-away mistake is invisible to the next person who makes it.

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

2 0bri_stats, pete_manc_UK
Reply Quote Save Share Report
mike_mod
Moderator
7,234
19,823
Nov 2023
New York
Online
Sep 15, 2025 at 5:17 PM#20

Moderator note: leaving this open. It is being argued well and the disagreement is the useful part. Report rather than reply if it drifts again.

24 22PurityPaulOR, MaxMetOK, MounjBrad and 21 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