GLPHubglpresearchhub.com
Read-only archive. GLP Research Hub is a static community record — nothing here is for sale, no account is needed, and no vote you cast is counted. Why?
Single comment threadYou are looking at one branch of [Question] is 99.0% actually fine or am I being sold a rounding error — 52 comments in the full submission. View in context.
5.1k
c/coa·submitted 1 year ago by u/aurel_boateng

[Question] is 99.0% actually fine or am I being sold a rounding error

Questionbranch of 11 comments

The claim in the title is exactly the claim I am making: is 99.0% actually fine or am I being sold a rounding error. Nothing implied beyond it. To save the first four comments: 99.0%. Sent one vial to Medutest and Janoshik. 98.4% and a claimed 97.5%. Cost me more than the vial and I would do it again. LC-MS gives you…

Read the full submission and all 52 comments →

This branch

11 comments, started 1 year ago
u/sofia_ferreira126 points·1 year ago

Related substances itemised individually is a much stronger document than a single total, because it tells you the shape of the impurity profile rather than its size.

replysharereportpermalink
u/santiago_szabo43 points·1 year ago

Agreed — the itemised related substances table is the difference between a document and a receipt.

replysharereportpermalink
u/clara_danquah30 points·1 year ago

a certificate with no method line is decorative

replysharereportpermalink
u/bastian_moreau21 points·1 year ago

That is the catalogue certificate rather than the batch-specific one. Same layout, completely different status.

replysharereportpermalink
u/freya_baptista20 points·1 year ago·edited

chromatogram or it did not happen

replysharereportpermalink
u/camila_lindqvist6 points·1 year ago

HPLC-UV and LC-MS answer different questions

replysharereportpermalink
u/santiago_szabo4 points·1 year ago·edited

Correcting myself upthread: I said the date was missing and it is on the second page, which I had not scrolled to.

replysharereportpermalink
u/amara_halonen2 points·1 year ago·edited

Correcting myself upthread: I said the date was missing and it is on the second page, which I had not scrolled to.

Disagree on this specific point. Two honest labs can resolve that impurity differently and report different numbers.

replysharereportpermalink
u/tomas_lehtinen36 points·1 year ago

water content is on there and everyone skips it

replysharereportpermalink
u/sunday_shot_sal55 points·1 year ago

Agreed on asking for the storage condition. It is one line and it changes how you read the entire stability claim.

replysharereportpermalink
u/aurel_boateng15 points·1 year ago

UV at 214nm sees the peptide bond and picks up almost everything; at 280nm you are looking at aromatics only. Which wavelength the number came from is part of the number.

replysharereportpermalink

← back to the whole thread

About c/coa

How to read a certificate of analysis and what it does and does not tell you. Area% versus mass%, identity versus quantity, water content, related substances, acetate counterions, and the difference between a vendor-supplied COA and an independent test on the vial you actually received.

71kmembers
130submissions
Aug 2023created
submissions / month, last year
Sponsored

PeptideMeter Analytics

Independent testing plus vendor-level trend data. Community-funded, unaffiliated.

peptidemeter.com
c/coa rules
  1. Post the full document. Cropped COAs that hide the batch number or date get removed.
  2. Redact your own name and order id, not the vendor's batch details.
  3. No "is this good?" without saying what the compound and claimed purity are.
  4. Independent community. Nobody here sells anything, and anyone who tries is banned.
  5. Not medical advice. Describe what you did; never prescribe to a stranger.
  6. Claims need evidence. Batch numbers, dated screenshots, independent test reports, or a citation.
  7. No referral links, discount codes or affiliate URLs. Permanent ban, no appeal.
  8. No contact handles, wallet addresses or tracking numbers — they identify people.
  9. Be recognisably decent. Disagree hard, insult nobody.
Moderators
Volunteers. Unpaid, unaffiliated, and reachable through modmail only.
Before you read on

Several compounds discussed on GLP Research Hub are sold for research use only and are not approved for human use anywhere. Nothing here is medical advice and none of it is written by your clinician. If a post reads like an instruction, treat it as a description of what one stranger did.