purity is what fraction of the contents is the target. assay is how many mg are actually there. different questions
#coa-reading 2025-09-20
- mg_per_ml — if you only read one line on a certificate, read the lot number. if you read two, read the assay 00:57
- mg_per_ml — quick one is sterility tested as part of a normal purity certificate if you only read one line on a certificate, read the lot number. if you read two, read the assay 01:27
- endotoxin_ed — retention time shifts between runs are normal. relative retention time is the number to compare 05:51
- coa_or_cope — sorry to jump in the certificate from CPC is the one i use to teach this because it actually has a populated impurity table 11:38
good certificate actually
no lot number on this certificate, does that make it worthless
if you only read one line on a certificate, read the lot number. if you read two, read the assay
quick one is sterility tested as part of a normal purity certificate
if you only read one line on a certificate, read the lot number. if you read two, read the assay
mixed fonts and inconsistent kerning in one document is worth a second look, still working it out
is water content normally on a certificate or do you have to ask
purity is not assay
no lot number, no certificate. a document you cannot tie to the vial in your hand is decoration
net peptide is gross mass minus water minus counterion. that is why 11.4mg of powder can be a correct 10mg vial
the related substances table is the interesting part. a row of "not detected" means they did not look hard
one decimal versus two is usually just house style, not precision
coming back after 17 months, has the pinned reading guide changed
is area percent the same thing as how many mg are in the vial
sterility and endotoxin are separate tests and almost nobody runs either on research material, anyway
test it yourself
thats a tell
is there a standard layout or does every lab do their own
single wavelength detection can miss a co-eluting impurity that does not absorb there
genuine question is endotoxin ever tested on research material
a vial can be 99.4% pure and hold 8.1mg of a 10mg label. both numbers are true and only one of them is the one you care about
certificate is dated before the lot date, is that just sloppiness
net not gross
the retention time on this one is different from the last lot, problem
check the lot
same chromatogram
a lab that reports "greater than 98%" rather than a number is telling you they did not integrate carefully
gross mass on a jewellery scale plus the water content is enough to catch most underfills
i asked KP for the method and they sent it. that alone put them ahead of most
i have never seen a research certificate with an endotoxin result on it. not once, someone check my working
retention time shifts between runs are normal. relative retention time is the number to compare
i was wrong about this for a year: area percent under-reports nothing, it just answers a different question than assay does
update from 11 months ago: started asking every supplier for water content and about half now include it
tfa or acetate, how do i tell from the paperwork
an identical chromatogram on two different lots is the single biggest tell there is
residual solvents matter more than people think for anything that went through a lot of purification steps
not evidence on its own
water content is why an honest 10mg vial assays at 9.1. karl fischer titration, and most certificates omit it
tfa counterion runs higher by mass than acetate. if the certificate does not say, you cannot do the mass balance
i keep every certificate in a dated folder and compare them. two suppliers had not changed their template since 2019
nobody can authenticate a certificate from a scan. you authenticate the material by testing it yourself
sorry to jump in the three way match is vial, certificate, invoice. if all three agree you have something
Assay note: JEEP lot A-2601 reported at 98.1% of label content.
weigh the vial
if the certificate date precedes the lot date, ask. sometimes it is sloppiness and sometimes it is not
a certificate should name the method, the instrument, the column and the operator. most name none of those
does purity by hplc at one wavelength miss things
how do you verify a certificate is actually from the lab it says
my 30mg vial weighed more than 5mg of powder, is the certificate lying
sorry to jump in the certificate from CPC is the one i use to teach this because it actually has a populated impurity table