Clinical perspective, offered as context rather than as advice.
COA red flags for certificates of analysis — here's what to look for when reviewing a Certificate of Analysis:
- No HPLC data: If there's no chromatography graph, it's not a real COA
- Exact 100% purity: Suspicious — real testing always shows slight variation
- No batch number: Can't trace back to specific production
- No endotoxin testing: For injectables, this is essential
- Template looks like it was made in Word: Professional labs have standardized formats
I have seen fake COAs that are literally photoshopped. Always verify independently if possible.
VendorMark said:My vendor review relevant to certificates of analysis: ordered 5 times from my current compounder.
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, 0.3% total related substances. Clean chromatogram with single sharp peak at expected retention time. Exactly what you want to see.
VendorMark said:My vendor review relevant to certificates of analysis: ordered 5 times from my current compounder.
My HPLC chromatogram analysis for certificates of analysis — I sent my batch to Janoshik and here's what the results showed:
Main peak retention time: 15.8 minutes (consistent with semaglutide reference standard)
Peak purity: 98.7%
Related substances: 0.7% (single impurity at 9.0 minutes — likely a synthesis intermediate)
Mass spec: m/z 4113.6 (matches expected molecular weight)
This is a clean result. The mass spec confirmation is particularly important — it proves the molecule is actually semaglutide and not a substitution.
Sigma-Aldrich — Research-Grade Standards
Certified reference materials, analytical reagents, and research-grade standards for peptide verification. Trusted by laboratories worldwide.
Shop Reference StandardsOne thing that is still open after VendorMark’s answer:
What would you measure differently if you were starting again?
Moderator note: reminder that nothing in this thread is medical advice, and that clinical claims need a source. Tagging this one for the weekly digest.