🍪 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 TestingInter-lab variability in peptide testing — July 2024 Page 7

Inter-lab variability in peptide testing — July 2024

PedsEndoPhilly Fri, Jan 31, 2025 at 9:32 PM 52 replies 2,419 viewsPage 7 of 11
ChrisMacros
Member
567
2,345
Sep 2024
Michigan
Mar 5, 2025 at 12:54 PM#31
PedsEndoPhilly said:
Reporting back with a partial result, because a partial result is still better than silence.

I read this differently from PedsEndoPhilly, on substance rather than tone. Not convinced. The evidence being cited is consistent with the conclusion and also consistent with two other conclusions nobody has ruled out.

44 17RunnerRach, TrialNerd_Beth, HPLC_Greg and 41 others
Reply Quote Save Share Report
hyun_seoul
Member
345
1,456
Jul 2024
Seoul, KR
Mar 7, 2025 at 11:31 PM#32
PedsEndoPhilly said:
Reporting back with a partial result, because a partial result is still better than silence.

Correct as far as it goes. The part it does not cover is what to do when the honest answer is "not enough data", which is more often than anyone likes.

Last edited: Mar 8, 2025 at 3:31 AM
45 18GenomicsKate, Dr.ObesityMed, HealthEcon_DC and 42 others
Reply Quote Save Share Report
quinn_sf
Member
489
2,123
Jun 2024
San Francisco, CA
Mar 10, 2025 at 10:06 AM#33
PedsEndoPhilly said:
Reporting back with a partial result, because a partial result is still better than silence.

Thank you for spelling out the reasoning rather than just the conclusion. Printing the relevant bit and taking it with me.

46 19mona_PHX, andrew_nyc, Dr.EndoEP and 43 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
LindaRN_retired
Member
189
890
Dec 2024
Sarasota, FL
Mar 12, 2025 at 8:40 PM#34

From the other side of the consultation, briefly. 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.

47 20LondonLisa, mike_nyc, VendorMark and 44 others
Reply Quote Save Share Report
kevin_tulsa
Member
489
2,123
Jun 2024
Tulsa, OK
Mar 15, 2025 at 7:12 AM#35
LindaRN_retired 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. Nothing to add that would improve it.

Last edited: Mar 15, 2025 at 9:12 AM
48 21NurseLeah_Nash, gary_naperville, sean_dublin and 45 others
Reply Quote Save Share Report
15678911

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