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] WXT vs JEEP on the same compound, same month — both cleared 97.0% — 38 comments in the full submission. View in context.
15k
c/coa·submitted 2 years ago by u/nikhil_lindqvist

[Vendor] WXT vs JEEP on the same compound, same month — both cleared 97.0%

Labbranch of 9 comments

The claim in the title is exactly the claim I am making: WXT vs JEEP on the same compound, same month — both cleared 97.0%. Nothing implied beyond it. Pulling the figures out of the title: 97.0%. All of it is written down as it happened rather than reconstructed. Sent one vial to Medutest and Janoshik. 99.6% and a…

Read the full submission and all 38 comments →

This branch

9 comments, started 2 years ago
u/freya_baptista976 points·2 years ago·edited

Careful — "the metadata looks odd" is a reason to ask a question, not a conclusion. Re-issues are ordinary.

replysharereportpermalink
u/sunday_shot_sal224 points·2 years ago

axis labels included, always

replysharereportpermalink
u/amara_halonen126 points·2 years ago·edited

Asked QSC for the batch-specific certificate and had the full document — batch, date, method line naming the column — inside six hours. That is now my baseline for everybody.

replysharereportpermalink
u/coa_janitormod · c/coa80 points·2 years ago

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/purity_pedantanalytical184 points·2 years ago

Are the related substances itemised or is it a single total?

replysharereportpermalink
u/mikkel_correia-3 points·2 years ago

redact your own name, never the batch details

replysharereportpermalink
u/nikhil_lindqvistOP1 point·2 years ago

redact your own name, never the batch details

mikkel_correia has the distinction right — one is a fraction of the detector signal, the other is a fraction of the mass.

replysharereportpermalink
u/soren_zamora1 point·2 years ago·edited

Correction: that is net peptide content, not purity. Different number, different meaning, and the document says so if you read the row label.

replysharereportpermalink
u/sunday_shot_sal1 point·2 years ago

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

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

Sigma-Aldrich Standards

Certified reference materials for peptide identity and purity work.

sigmaaldrich.com
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.