🍪 CompoundTalk uses cookies to improve your experience, analyze traffic, and personalize content. By continuing to use this site, you agree to our Cookie Policy.
Evidence-based GLP-1 & peptide discussion since 2023
ForumsCOA & Analytical TestingMy vendor COA looks sketchy - can someone take a look — anyone have experience? Page 3

My vendor COA looks sketchy - can someone take a look — anyone have experience?

BethLabQueen Thu, Feb 22, 2024 at 7:37 AM 12 replies 2,137 viewsPage 3 of 3
Dr.GutHealth
Senior Member
1,456
7,890
Mar 2024
Minnesota
Feb 28, 2024 at 3:18 AM#11
jim_asheville said:
They are not contradictory, they measure different things, and this is the single most common misreading of a certificate.

No disagreement with jim_asheville. One condition attached. One addition: an unstated method makes a report close to uninterpretable. "99% pure" without the technique, the standard and the conditions is a claim, not a measurement.

Last edited: Feb 28, 2024 at 8:18 AM
49 22VanRx_Mike, steve_okc, dave_SLC and 46 others
Reply Quote Save Share Report
Dr.DermMIA
Member
456
2,123
May 2024
Miami, FL
Mar 1, 2024 at 4:13 AM#12
Dr.NateNeph said:
Right, and one flattering data point from a group buy is not consistency.

Bookmarking. The distinction being drawn above is the one nobody else makes.

50 23Dr.RenalNash, LipidDoc_ATL, BariatricNurseD and 47 others
Reply Quote Save Share Report
MikeNYC_runner
Member
378
1,678
Jul 2024
New York, NY
Mar 3, 2024 at 5:07 AM#13
jim_asheville said:
They are not contradictory, they measure different things, and this is the single most common misreading of a certificate.

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.

1 24Dr.ObesityMed
Reply Quote Save Share Report

Sigma-Aldrich — Research-Grade Standards

Certified reference materials, analytical reagents, and research-grade standards for peptide verification. Trusted by laboratories worldwide.

Shop Reference Standards
DoseLogDan
Member
201
567
Feb 2025
Montana
Mar 5, 2024 at 6:00 AM#14
BethLabQueen said:
Eight months with one supplier, then a change in how they communicate that I noticed before I noticed anything about the product.

Vendor reputation tracking for vendor vetting: I maintain a personal spreadsheet with every order I've placed — date, vendor, batch number, Janoshik result, personal efficacy assessment (1-5 scale), and any issues.

After 20 orders across 5 vendors: average purity 97.4%, zero sterility concerns, 0 shipping issues (all resolved). This data gives me confidence in my current source and documentation if issues arise.

I encourage everyone to track their orders systematically. Community data aggregation makes us all safer.

Last edited: Mar 5, 2024 at 7:00 AM
2 0sophie_paris, mel_PDX
Reply Quote Save Share Report
Admin
Administrator
2,456
9,812
Oct 2023
Online
Mar 7, 2024 at 6:52 AM#15

Moderator note: a post naming a supplier has been edited. Discuss suppliers in the review sections, not here. Thread quality here is what the rules are for. Keep it up.

Last edited: Mar 7, 2024 at 10:52 AM
3 1PeptideSynthNJ, Dr.KarenChen, Dr.NateNeph
Reply Quote Save Share Report

Similar Threads

HPLC vs UPLC for peptide purity — method comparison study18 replies
Mass spectrometry for peptide identity verification — ESI-MS guide7 replies
Endotoxin testing methods — LAL vs recombinant Factor C17 replies
Red flags on COAs — how to spot a fake certificate5 replies
USP reference standards for peptide verification — sourcing guide3 replies
ForumsNewTrendingMembersAccount

Log In

Forgot password?
No account? Register