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 9 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

9 comments, started 1 year ago
u/clara_danquah340 points·1 year ago

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 85% peptide by mass.

replysharereportpermalink
u/step_therapy_s405 points·1 year ago

I would not read a rounded figure as evasive. Plenty of documents round to one decimal as house style.

replysharereportpermalink
u/yara_antonsen112 points·1 year ago

the counterion is part of the mass you paid for

replysharereportpermalink
u/tidy_vialdrawer_pls27 points·1 year ago

This. Area percent answers "what fraction of what the detector saw was the peak I wanted", and people read it as "how much peptide is in the vial".

replysharereportpermalink
u/tidy_vialdrawer_watch2827 points·1 year ago·edited

My first certificate had a compound name, a percentage and a logo. I thought that was normal. It is not, and now I know what to ask for.

replysharereportpermalink
u/mikkel_correia8 points·1 year ago

ask for the storage condition the stability statement was written against

replysharereportpermalink
u/meera_sandvik6 points·1 year ago

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

replysharereportpermalink
u/aurel_boatengOP157 points·1 year ago

a total of 0.4% tells you less than four named impurities adding to 0.6%

replysharereportpermalink
u/dead_space_doug75 points·1 year ago

batch number, date of analysis, method, individual impurities — that is the minimum set

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

Janoshik Analytical

Independent HPLC and mass spec. The number you get is the number they found.

janoshik.com
Sponsored

GL Biochem (Shanghai)

Custom peptides and amino acids direct from the manufacturer since 1998. ISO 9001 / cGMP. Batch COA every order.

glbiochem.net
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.