🍪 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 TestingParticulate matter testing — 6 month update Page 2

Particulate matter testing — 6 month update

SarahChen_PharmD Fri, Apr 19, 2024 at 2:09 AM 14 replies 1,992 viewsPage 2 of 3
NurseKim_ATL
Senior Member
1,678
7,234
Feb 2024
Atlanta, GA
Apr 19, 2024 at 2:19 PM#6
RetaRick_CA 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.

23 18denise_HTX, raj_cambridge, ingrid_STO and 20 others
Reply Quote Save Share Report
DataDave
Senior Member
1,678
8,901
Apr 2024
Washington
Online
Apr 19, 2024 at 7:08 PM#7
SarahChen_PharmD said:
Two reports on the same product from two laboratories, four percentage points apart, and no method stated on either.

Vendor quality matters when discussing certificates of analysis. I've tested my last 6 batches through Janoshik and purity has ranged from 98.1% to 100.7%. 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.

22 17mike_nyc, VendorMark, COA_Karl and 19 others
Reply Quote Save Share Report
claudia_zurich
Member
389
1,678
Jul 2024
Zurich, CH
Apr 19, 2024 at 11:57 PM#8
NurseKim_ATL said:
I am more sceptical of certificates as a category than this thread is.

I tested my certificates of analysis batch through Janoshik — 98.1% purity. That's within acceptable range for compounded peptides. Turnaround was 10 business days.

The test costs ~$148 but gives you actual HPLC chromatography data plus mass spec confirmation. For the peace of mind alone, it's worth every penny. I test every new batch from a new vendor.

21 16Dr.LipidDallas, alex_tucson, kevin_tulsa and 18 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
anna.melb_AU
Member
678
2,890
Apr 2024
Melbourne, AU
Apr 20, 2024 at 4:46 AM#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?

20 15tammy_FL, Dr.LipidDallas, alex_tucson and 17 others
Reply Quote Save Share Report
SarahChen_PharmD
VIP Member
4,567
22,341
Dec 2023
San Diego, CA
Apr 21, 2024 at 3:53 AM#10

OP back with an update, since a thread like this is useless without one.

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.

10 8robert_kc, dan_philly, MeganSA_TX and 7 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