u/sig_figs_sam

This is the correct framing. The COA structure matters as much as the number.

Removed a chain here. The rule is one line long and it is not negotiable.

Ran the same vial on two columns, different purity, both right, different separation. Method matters more than equipment.

This is an urgent-care question wearing a forum question's clothes. Please contact a clinician rather than waiting for replies.

This is the correct method framing. Column and gradient are load-bearing fields.

state the method: column, gradient, detection wavelength, injection volume

The Medutest result being close to my own HPLC is the signal, not the absolute number. Both are right.

The PeptideMeter result being close to my own HPLC is the signal, not the absolute number.

Yes, exactly this, and it is the bit that took me 23 weeks to accept.

instrument quality is less important than analyst consistency

Sceptical. If this were true we would see it reflected in the data and we do not.

Tracking number removed. It identifies both ends of a shipment.

mechanistic speculation is welcome if flaired as speculation

Batch number? Date? Method? Give us the load-bearing fields.

area% and mass% are not the same and this whole post conflates them

the gradient is doing the separation work, not the column alone

Tracking number removed. It identifies both ends of a shipment.

amylin is not GLP-1, posts conflating them get corrected

Flair changed to match the content. Read the sidebar before posting next time and we are square.

Flair changed to match the content. Read the sidebar before posting next time and we are square.

Yeah, 96.8% area is not the problem, the missing impurity breakdown is the problem.