🍪 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 TestingIs 98% purity actually good or should I be worried — need advice

Is 98% purity actually good or should I be worried — need advice

Dr.CardioMD Tue, Jan 9, 2024 at 10:22 AM 14 replies 2,095 viewsPage 1 of 3
This thread is more than 29 months old. Information may be outdated. Consider searching for more recent discussions.
Dr.CardioMD
VIP Member
2,678
14,567
Dec 2023
Cleveland, OH
Jan 9, 2024 at 10:22 AM#1

Two reports on the same product from two laboratories, four percentage points apart, and no method stated on either.

The four things to check on any report, in order: does it name your batch, who commissioned it, what method was used, and does it report content as well as purity. A report failing any of those is weak evidence regardless of the percentage on it.

The question I want answered is why two laboratories report different purity for the same batch, and which number to believe.

If the honest answer is that nobody knows, that is a useful answer and I would rather have it.

9 4kim_atl_prep, sarah_TO, wendy_avl and 6 others
Reply Quote Save Share Report
DanielChem_CHI
Senior Member
1,234
5,678
Mar 2024
Chicago, IL
Jan 9, 2024 at 10:39 AM#2

Short answer first, then the reasoning. Inter-laboratory variation comes from real methodological differences, not sloppiness: which reference standard was used and how it was itself calibrated, the gradient and column, the detection wavelength, and where the integration baseline was drawn. A percentage point or two between competent labs is expected. What is not expected is a large gap, and the usual explanation there is that one report is not of the batch in your hand.

8 3Dr.DermMIA, fiona_VT, denise_HTX and 5 others
Reply Quote Save Share Report
ChrisMacros
Member
567
2,345
Sep 2024
Michigan
Jan 9, 2024 at 10:56 AM#3
DanielChem_CHI said:
Inter-laboratory variation comes from real methodological differences, not sloppiness: which reference standard was used and how it was itself…

That is correct as far as it goes, and here is where it stops going. 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: Jan 9, 2024 at 1:56 PM
7 2HPLC_Greg, LibrarianMeg, bri_stats and 4 others
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
TinaHashiRN
Member
345
1,567
Sep 2024
Raleigh, NC
Jan 9, 2024 at 11:13 AM#4
Dr.CardioMD said:
Two reports on the same product from two laboratories, four percentage points apart, and no method stated on either.

This matches mine closely enough to be worth saying so. They are not contradictory, they measure different things, and this is the single most common misreading of a certificate. Purity is a relative area measurement: the main peak as a percentage of total peak area in the chromatogram. Content is an absolute mass measurement against a reference standard. A vial can be 99% pure and contain 6.1mg — pure material, overfilled — or 99% pure and contain 3mg, which is pure material and a short fill. Purity tells you what fraction of what is there is the right molecule; content tells you how much of it there is. You need both, and a certificate with only purity is telling you half the story.

Last edited: Jan 9, 2024 at 5:13 PM
6 1Admin, Dr.Martinez, mike_mod and 3 others
Reply Quote Save Share Report
Dr.MetabolicMD
VIP Member
2,345
16,789
Jan 2024
Rochester, MN
Jan 9, 2024 at 12:46 PM#5

Clinical perspective, offered as context rather than as advice.

My vendor review relevant to certificates of analysis: ordered 6 times from my current compounder. Consistency has been excellent.

Shipping: 3-day with temperature monitor
Packaging: Professional, discreet, proper labeling with lot/batch numbers
Purity: 99.3% average across orders (Janoshik verified)
Customer service: Responsive within 1 hours
Price: $139/month for semaglutide 1.7mg equivalent

5 0GenomicsKate, Dr.ObesityMed, HealthEcon_DC and 2 others
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