pete_manc_UK said:The provenance questions are more useful than the numbers.
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.
Ask again with the specifics and you will get a better answer than this one.
wendy_avl said:Two reports on the same product from two laboratories, four percentage points apart, and no method stated on either.
HPLC results interpretation for certificates of analysis: when you get your Janoshik report back, here's what the numbers mean:
- Purity %: Should be >97%. Below 95% is concerning.
- Retention time: Should match reference standard for the peptide
- Related substances: Degradation products should be <2% total
- Single impurity: No individual impurity should exceed 1%
My last batch: 99.7% purity, 0.1% total related substances. Clean chromatogram with single sharp peak at expected retention time. Exactly what you want to see.
Dr.GastroMayo said:I am more sceptical of certificates as a category than this thread is.
COA red flags for certificates of analysis — here's what to look for when reviewing a Certificate of Analysis:
- No HPLC data: If there's no chromatography graph, it's not a real COA
- Exact 100% purity: Suspicious — real testing always shows slight variation
- No batch number: Can't trace back to specific production
- No endotoxin testing: For injectables, this is essential
- Template looks like it was made in Word: Professional labs have standardized formats
I have seen fake COAs that are literally photoshopped. Always verify independently if possible.
Sigma-Aldrich — Research-Grade Standards
Certified reference materials, analytical reagents, and research-grade standards for peptide verification. Trusted by laboratories worldwide.
Shop Reference StandardsFollowing on from GraceAZ_72 — and this may be the naive question:
Why two laboratories report different purity for the same batch, and which number to believe?
Closing the loop on my own question.
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.