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 [Vendor] SSA vs TFC on the same compound, same month — both cleared 97.5% — 31 comments in the full submission. View in context.
7.4k
c/coa·submitted 2 years ago by u/marisol_frisk

[Vendor] SSA vs TFC on the same compound, same month — both cleared 97.5%

Explainerbranch of 7 comments

SSA vs TFC on the same compound, same month — both cleared 97.5%. I will put the method line and the batch identifier up front because that is what makes this checkable. 97.5%. Those are measured, not estimated, and not rounded up in my favour. Started keeping a folder of every certificate I have been sent. The ones…

Read the full submission and all 31 comments →

This branch

7 comments, started 2 years ago
u/wrong_network_w830 points·2 years ago

That is not what the method line says. It names the technique; it does not certify the operator.

replysharereportpermalink
[removed]314 points·2 years ago

[removed by moderator]

replysharereportpermalink
u/rania_okonkwo200 points·2 years ago·edited

Water content 3.8%, acetate 6.2%, purity 99%, net peptide about 90% of label weight. All four numbers honest, and I had to read it twice.

replysharereportpermalink
u/marisol_friskOP159 points·2 years ago

What does the method line actually say? Not the technique — the column and the gradient.

replysharereportpermalink
u/katrin_girard38 points·2 years ago·edited

Is water content on the document? It changes your concentration arithmetic.

replysharereportpermalink
u/cesar_ivaturi40 points·2 years ago·edited

net peptide content and purity are two different numbers on the same vial

replysharereportpermalink
u/ignacio_silva26 points·2 years ago

HPLC-UV and LC-MS answer different questions

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
More in c/coa
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.
Full rules and how they are enforced →
Moderators
u/coa_janitoru/purity_pedantu/coa_collectoru/certified_referenceu/first_hundred
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.

Full disclaimer →