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.
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.
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.
Sigma-Aldrich — Research-Grade Standards
Certified reference materials, analytical reagents, and research-grade standards for peptide verification. Trusted by laboratories worldwide.
Shop Reference StandardsA 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?
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.