reading water content threads from 2024 and half of it aged badly
reading water content threads from 2024 and half of it aged badly. It is the sort of thing everyone half-believes and nobody writes down. Net peptide content is the fraction of the powder that is actually peptide once counterion, water and residual solvent are accounted for. A 99% pure acetate salt can still be about…
Not quite. Two labs with different gradients can resolve a close-eluting impurity differently and both be reporting honestly.
Cosigning. The batch identifier is load-bearing, and a certificate that cannot be tied to the vial in your hand is not about your vial.
Reminder: a question about a document is not an accusation about a supplier, and posts that blur the two get retitled.
axis labels included, always
identity and quantity are two questions and most documents answer one
Disagree that a lower number is automatically worse. A conservative claim that survives testing is worth more than an optimistic one that does not.
Correcting myself upthread: I said the date was missing and it is on the second page, which I had not scrolled to.
What does the method line actually say? Not the technique — the column and the gradient.