🍪 The GLP Lounge 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 TestingEndotoxin testing methods — what worked for you? Page 8

Endotoxin testing methods — what worked for you?

kevin_tulsa Sat, Oct 19, 2024 at 2:46 AM 37 replies 2,040 viewsPage 8 of 8
DeniseRN_TPA
Member
345
1,567
Aug 2024
Tampa, FL
Oct 26, 2024 at 6:26 PM#36
EndoResFellow said:
The distinction that resolves most of these threads is between what is true on average and what is true for one person.

There is a second half to this that has not been said yet. The version of this that has an answer is narrower than the version being asked. Narrow it and it becomes tractable; leave it broad and the thread will produce nine confident and incompatible replies.

28 1jim_asheville, matt_MKE, Dr.ReproEndo and 25 others
Reply Quote Save Share Report
FDA_TrackerJim
Senior Member
1,567
7,890
Feb 2024
Rockville, MD
Oct 27, 2024 at 3:15 AM#37

Adding the numbers, since they settle part of this. Keep the original post as written when you update it, and add the correction underneath. An edited-away mistake is invisible to the next person who makes it.

29 2Admin, Dr.Martinez, mike_mod and 26 others
Reply Quote Save Share Report
TomTeleRx
Member
189
678
Feb 2025
Delaware
Oct 27, 2024 at 12:04 PM#38

A narrower follow-up, since the general answer is now clear:

Was that from a primary source or from a summary of one?

30 3LibrarianMeg, bri_stats, pete_manc_UK and 27 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
ChrisMacros
Member
567
2,345
Sep 2024
Michigan
Oct 27, 2024 at 8:53 PM#39
FDA_TrackerJim said:
Keep the original post as written when you update it, and add the correction underneath.

Filing a mild objection. Mild because I might be wrong; an objection because nobody has addressed the case that does not fit. Pushing back on the anecdote-stacking. Twenty people reporting the same thing is twenty samples from the same self-selected pool, not twenty independent confirmations.

31 4LibrarianMeg, bri_stats, pete_manc_UK and 28 others
Reply Quote Save Share Report
emily_PDX
Member
245
1,123
Nov 2024
Portland, OR
Oct 28, 2024 at 5:41 AM#40
FDA_TrackerJim said:
Keep the original post as written when you update it, and add the correction underneath.

No disagreement, though the timescale matters more than the mechanism here. Most of what looks like a difference in kind turns out to be a difference in how long somebody waited.

3 1PeptideSynthNJ, Dr.KarenChen, Dr.NateNeph
Reply Quote Save Share Report
1678

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