🍪 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 TestingBatch-to-batch purity variation — looking for input

Batch-to-batch purity variation — looking for input

anders_CPH Fri, Aug 30, 2024 at 7:28 AM 19 replies 2,061 viewsPage 1 of 4
This thread is more than 21 months old. Information may be outdated. Consider searching for more recent discussions.
anders_CPH
Senior Member
1,567
7,234
Feb 2024
Copenhagen, DK
Aug 30, 2024 at 7:28 AM#1

I have a certificate reporting 99.2% purity and 6.1mg content on a vial sold as 5mg, and I cannot work out whether those two numbers are consistent or contradictory.

The narrow version of the question is whether a purity figure and a content figure can disagree without one of them being wrong.

Happy to be told the question itself is wrong.

21 16CryptoCarl, MariaRD, AussieAnna and 18 others
Reply Quote Save Share Report
DataDave
Senior Member
1,678
8,901
Apr 2024
Washington
Online
Aug 30, 2024 at 7:49 AM#2

This one has a reasonably settled answer, so here it is. The provenance questions are more useful than the numbers. Does the report name the batch on your vial. Is the date consistent with when that batch existed. Is it addressed to the vendor or to the person who paid for the test. Was the sample taken from general stock or supplied by the vendor. A perfect certificate for a different batch is worth nothing, and vendor-supplied samples are the most common way a genuine report ends up misleading.

Last edited: Aug 30, 2024 at 8:49 AM
20 15mike_nyc, VendorMark, COA_Karl and 17 others
Reply Quote Save Share Report
FranDenver
Member
267
1,123
Oct 2024
Denver, CO
Aug 30, 2024 at 8:10 AM#3
DataDave said:
The provenance questions are more useful than the numbers.

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.

If somebody has the primary source to hand I would rather cite it than paraphrase it.

19 14BariatricNurseD, MASHdoc_SA, GenomicsKate and 16 others
Reply Quote Save Share Report

PeptideMeter — Independent Peptide Analytics

Community-driven peptide testing and vendor rating platform. Transparent results. Unbiased analysis. Trusted by thousands.

View Results
maya_sedona
Member
289
1,234
Sep 2024
Sedona, AZ
Aug 30, 2024 at 8:31 AM#4
anders_CPH said:
I have a certificate reporting 99.2% purity and 6.1mg content on a vial sold as 5mg, and I cannot work out whether those two numbers are consistent or…

This matches mine closely enough to be worth saying so. 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.

18 13MikeKY_noInsulin, Dr.RaviCardio, jennifer_SEA and 15 others
Reply Quote Save Share Report
sarah_TO
Member
278
1,234
Sep 2024
Toronto, CA
Aug 30, 2024 at 10:27 AM#5

Clinical perspective, offered as context rather than as advice.

HPLC results interpretation for certificates of analysis: when you get your Janoshik report back, here's what the numbers mean:

  • Purity %: Should be >97%. Below 95% is concerning.
  • Retention time: Should match reference standard for the peptide
  • Related substances: Degradation products should be <2% total
  • Single impurity: No individual impurity should exceed 1%

My last batch: 99.3% purity, 0.1% total related substances. Clean chromatogram with single sharp peak at expected retention time. Exactly what you want to see.

Last edited: Aug 30, 2024 at 2:27 PM
17 12DanielChem_CHI, marco_milano, pam_columbus and 14 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