🍪 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 TestingLC-MS/MS vs HPLC for peptide analysis — November 2025 Page 5

LC-MS/MS vs HPLC for peptide analysis — November 2025

HealthEcon_DC Tue, Nov 18, 2025 at 8:01 PM 29 replies 1,356 viewsPage 5 of 6
Dr.NutriCornell
Senior Member
1,345
6,234
Mar 2024
Ithaca, NY
Nov 21, 2025 at 4:01 AM#21
Dr.SportsMedIN said:
Third-party testing services for certificates of analysis besides Janoshik: Janoshik: Gold standard for peptide community, ~$141, 10-14 day turnaround…

Vendor quality matters when discussing certificates of analysis. I've tested my last 4 batches through Janoshik and purity has ranged from 98.7% to 100.5%. 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.

21 19emily_PDX, Dr.SleepRoch, laura_annarbor and 18 others
Reply Quote Save Share Report
DoseLogDan
Member
201
567
Feb 2025
Montana
Nov 21, 2025 at 1:48 PM#22

One concrete data point for the thread. Practical: whatever you change, write down the date and the reason. In three months the reason is what you will have forgotten, and the reason is what makes the record worth having.

22 20Dr.AddMedPHL, newstart_MO, mia_MS2 and 19 others
Reply Quote Save Share Report
mona_PHX
Member
189
890
Dec 2024
Phoenix, AZ
Nov 21, 2025 at 11:34 PM#23

One thing that is still open after Dr.SportsMedIN’s answer:

Did your prescriber agree with that reading, and if not what was their objection?

23 21SallyK_inj, CryptoCarl, MariaRD and 20 others
Reply Quote Save Share Report

Janoshik Analytical — Independent Testing

Trusted third-party HPLC & mass spectrometry analysis. Verify peptide purity with the lab the community relies on. Independent. Accurate. Transparent.

Verify Your Peptides

GL Biochem (Shanghai) Ltd. — Direct Manufacturer

Est. 1998. The synthesis house behind the vials you send for testing. ISO 9001 and cGMP certified, 1,500+ staff, batch-specific COA with every order.

Browse GL Biochem
FitDadDave
Member
534
2,678
Jul 2024
Minneapolis, MN
Nov 22, 2025 at 9:20 AM#24
DoseLogDan said:
Practical: whatever you change, write down the date and the reason.

This is where I part company with the consensus forming above. Pushing back on the consensus forming here. Consistency is not the same as correctness, and a board that agrees with itself quickly is usually agreeing with the first person who sounded certain.

24 22wendy_avl, jason_paloalto, Dr.LeslieOBGYN and 21 others
Reply Quote Save Share Report
sarah_nash92
Member
712
3,123
Jun 2024
Nashville, TN
Nov 22, 2025 at 7:06 PM#25
DoseLogDan said:
Practical: whatever you change, write down the date and the reason.

Agreed, and the size of the effect matters as much as its existence. Something real and small gets treated here as though it were real and decisive.

Last edited: Nov 23, 2025 at 1:06 AM
25 23KetoKyle, CanadaChris, ZaraB_AL and 22 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