🍪 The GLP Lounge 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 TestingWhat even IS a COA and why should I care

What even IS a COA and why should I care

nick_newbie Sat, May 16, 2026 at 8:12 PM 5 replies 356 viewsPage 1 of 1
nick_newbie
New Member
18
56
Jun 2026
Virginia
Online
May 16, 2026 at 8:12 PM#1

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 contradictory.

The four things to check on any report, in order: does it name your batch, who commissioned it, what method was used, and does it report content as well as purity. A report failing any of those is weak evidence regardless of the percentage on it.

The bit I cannot resolve on my own is why two laboratories report different purity for the same batch, and which number to believe.

Practical detail welcome, however dull — the duller the better.

17 12robert_kc, dan_philly, MeganSA_TX and 14 others
Reply Quote Save Share Report
COA_Karl
Senior Member
2,123
8,901
Jan 2024
Pennsylvania
May 16, 2026 at 8:52 PM#2

This one has a reasonably settled answer, so here it is. The provenance questions are more useful than the numbers. Does the report name the batch on your vial. Is the date consistent with when that batch existed. Is it addressed to the vendor or to the person who paid for the test. Was the sample taken from general stock or supplied by the vendor. A perfect certificate for a different batch is worth nothing, and vendor-supplied samples are the most common way a genuine report ends up misleading.

Last edited: May 16, 2026 at 9:52 PM
16 11jim_asheville, matt_MKE, Dr.ReproEndo and 13 others
Reply Quote Save Share Report
hank_denver
Member
278
1,234
Sep 2024
Denver, CO
May 16, 2026 at 9:32 PM#3
COA_Karl said:
The provenance questions are more useful than the numbers.

No disagreement with COA_Karl. One condition attached. One addition: an unstated method makes a report close to uninterpretable. "99% pure" without the technique, the standard and the conditions is a claim, not a measurement.

Correct me if the detail matters more than I have assumed.

Last edited: May 17, 2026 at 1:32 AM
15 10denise_HTX, raj_cambridge, ingrid_STO and 12 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
amy_econ_NJ
Member
567
2,567
May 2024
Princeton, NJ
May 16, 2026 at 10:12 PM#4
nick_newbie 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…

Same position here, arrived at the long way round. Inter-laboratory variation comes from real methodological differences, not sloppiness: which reference standard was used and how it was itself calibrated, the gradient and column, the detection wavelength, and where the integration baseline was drawn. A percentage point or two between competent labs is expected. What is not expected is a large gap, and the usual explanation there is that one report is not of the batch in your hand.

14 9gary_naperville, sean_dublin, hannah_MT and 11 others
Reply Quote Save Share Report
MASHdoc_SA
Member
456
2,345
Aug 2024
San Antonio, TX
May 17, 2026 at 1:54 AM#5

Adding the clinical framing, because it changes how the question reads.

Third-party testing services for certificates of analysis besides Janoshik:

  • Janoshik: Gold standard for peptide community, ~$152, 10-14 day turnaround
  • Valitech: US-based, ISO 17025 accredited, ~$242
  • Eurofins: Full pharmaceutical testing suite, more expensive but comprehensive
  • ChemTox: Basic identity and purity testing, ~$112

Janoshik is the community standard but any ISO-accredited analytical lab can verify peptide identity and purity. The key is independence — don't rely solely on the vendor's own testing.

Last edited: May 17, 2026 at 4:54 AM
13 8kate.chem, DataDave, Dr.GutHealth and 10 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