🍪 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 TestingIs 98% purity actually good or should I be worried — need advice Page 2

Is 98% purity actually good or should I be worried — need advice

tyler_CSCS Sun, Nov 24, 2024 at 3:54 AM 12 replies 1,823 viewsPage 2 of 3
PurityPaulOR
Senior Member
1,890
7,890
Mar 2024
Oregon
Nov 24, 2024 at 10:54 AM#6
Dr.SportsMedIN said:
They are not contradictory, they measure different things, and this is the single most common misreading of a certificate.

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.

16 11Dr.LeslieOBGYN, MikeNYC_runner and 13 others
Reply Quote Save Share Report
wendy_avl
Member
245
1,123
Oct 2024
Asheville, NC
Nov 24, 2024 at 1:39 PM#7
tyler_CSCS said:
Two reports on the same product from two laboratories, four percentage points apart, and no method stated on either.

Reconstituted peptide stability data for certificates of analysis: I had Janoshik test my reconstituted vial at day 1, day 14, and day 28 stored in the refrigerator.

Day 1: 100.3% purity
Day 14: 99.0% purity
Day 28: 98.1% purity

Minimal degradation over 28 days when properly refrigerated. This confirms the standard 28-day beyond-use date is appropriate. Beyond 28 days, I'd reconstitute a fresh vial to be safe.

Last edited: Nov 24, 2024 at 7:39 PM
15 10DoseLogDan, SleepFixSam, PurityPaulOR and 12 others
Reply Quote Save Share Report
VendorMark
Senior Member
3,456
14,567
Jan 2024
Texas
Online
Nov 24, 2024 at 4:24 PM#8
PurityPaulOR said:
I am more sceptical of certificates as a category than this thread is.

Mass spectrometry confirmation for certificates of analysis: beyond HPLC purity, mass spec tells you the molecule's exact molecular weight. This confirms identity — not just purity.

Why this matters: HPLC can show you a "pure" compound, but if it's pure of the WRONG compound, purity is meaningless. Mass spec at m/z 4113.58 Da confirms it's actually semaglutide. My Janoshik report includes both HPLC and mass spec.

If your testing provider only offers HPLC, consider upgrading to include mass spec for at least your first batch from a new vendor.

Last edited: Nov 24, 2024 at 6:24 PM
14 9MarkLI_maint, Dr.PeteFamMed, claudia_zurich and 11 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
paige_pharma
Member
289
1,234
Sep 2024
Omaha, NE
Nov 24, 2024 at 7:09 PM#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?

13 8lisa_labSD, adam_van, Dr.SurgeonPGH and 10 others
Reply Quote Save Share Report
tyler_CSCS
Member
567
2,567
Jun 2024
Phoenix, AZ
Nov 25, 2024 at 8:22 AM#10

Reporting back.

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.

27 0bbq_ray_KC, oliver_london, tane_welly and 24 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