GLPHubglpresearchhub.com
Read-only archive. GLP Research Hub is a static community record — nothing here is for sale, no account is needed, and no vote you cast is counted. Why?
BA

u/batch_number_bertie

Same batch number on two different vendors means one thing and it is not good.

long-standing contributor · vetting · joined 24 Oct 2023

2,039post karma
14,437comment karma
3submissions
100comments

Overview — page 3 of 3

comment on the handling question that gets asked weekly, answered properly in c/researchpeptides · 26 points · 1 year ago

For any compound with a thin testing history, identity is the first question. Mass spectrometry against a theoretical mass answers it; an area-percent purity figure does not.

permalink

comment on [PSA] TB-500 is not what most of this community thinks it is in c/researchpeptides · 52 points · 1 year ago

Not convinced. A purity figure without a stated method is not comparable to one that has a method attached.

permalink

comment on PeptideMeter — 8 things I got wrong before I got it right in c/vendorvetting · 23 points · 1 year ago

Independent testing is worth more than a supplied certificate for one structural reason: the chain of custody. A member who buys, ships and pays is testing the same thing you would receive.

permalink

comment on three years of oral GLP-1 threads, summarised so you do not have to read them in c/orforglipron · 87 points · 1 year ago

It is a non-peptide small-molecule agonist at the GLP-1 receptor. That is a substantial medicinal chemistry achievement: getting a small molecule to activate a receptor evolved for a peptide ligand.

permalink

comment on [PSA] testing is not what most of this community thinks it is in c/vendorvetting · 48 points · 1 year ago

registration number, then everything else

permalink

comment on sequence: what the trials say vs what this community says in c/bpc157 · 0 points · 1 year ago

Has anyone posted an independent result on that batch?

piotr_grimaldi is right that a pure something-else is still something else.

permalink

comment on [Discussion] can we stop arguing about bacteriostatic water until somebody posts a number in c/reconstitution · 1 points · 1 year ago

I would not round that figure. At 2.5mg/mL a rounding error of two units is a real fraction of the intended amount.

permalink

comment on [Question] mg/mL — what am I missing here in c/reconstitution · 48 points · 1 year ago

a U-100 syringe reads 100 units to the millilitre, every time

permalink

comment on [Discussion] can we stop arguing about Medutest until somebody posts a number in c/vendorvetting · 466 points · 1 year ago

Flair set to Vendor. Also a reminder that we take no money from any supplier in the directory.

permalink

comment on reship — 11 things I got wrong before I got it right in c/vendorvetting · 825 points · 2 years ago

Left up. It names an operation, it carries a date and a lot, and it is written as a report rather than an accusation.

permalink

comment on [Discussion] order records are doing more work than we give it credit for in c/vendorvetting · 59 points · 2 years ago

Tracking number redacted from the post above. It identifies both ends of a shipment.

permalink

comment on [Meta] proposal — a flair for units posts in c/reconstitution · 211 points · 2 years ago

Working has to be shown on arithmetic posts.

Right, and the arithmetic behind it: 30mg in 3mL is 10mg/mL, so 2.5mg is 25 units.

permalink

comment on [Question] testing — what am I missing here in c/vendorvetting · 106 points · 2 years ago

Left up. It names an operation, it carries a date and a lot, and it is written as a report rather than an accusation.

permalink

comment on vendor is the most under-discussed thing on this board in c/vendorvetting · 572 points · 2 years ago

Left up. It names an operation, it carries a date and a lot, and it is written as a report rather than an accusation.

permalink

comment on [Discussion] the mg/mL advice in here is 3 years out of date in c/reconstitution · 15 points · 2 years ago

The dead space question sent me down a rabbit hole for a week. It is a fraction of a unit and it is the same every draw.

permalink

comment on [Lab] split one vial across PeptideMeter and VendorInvestigate — 99.0% and 99.1% in c/vendorvetting · 1 points · 2 years ago

registration number, then everything else

permalink

comment on [Lab] split one vial across PeptideMeter and VendorInvestigate — 99.0% and 99.1% in c/vendorvetting · 688 points · 2 years ago

Tracking number redacted from the post above. It identifies both ends of a shipment.

permalink

comment on [Lab] split one vial across PeptideMeter and VendorInvestigate — 99.0% and 99.1% in c/vendorvetting · 3.1k points · 2 years ago

Why the directory has two tiers, since the question comes up whenever somebody new finds it.

Twenty suppliers have enough independent results, over enough separate lots, over enough time, that the log says something. Those get a page, a test table and a link to their own storefront so you can compare their claims with the record.

The rest — nearly two hundred names — get a row, a band and a report count. Not because they are bad, but because two results is an anecdote about a vial. Manufacturing a score out of that would make the whole directory worthless, and the contrast is the point.

permalink

comment on how much of what we believe about testing actually comes from Janoshik threads in c/vendorvetting · 719 points · 2 years ago

Tracking number redacted from the post above. It identifies both ends of a shipment.

permalink

comment on someone explain Janoshik to me like I have not read a paper in years in c/vendorvetting · 338 points · 2 years ago

Small fix — the figure you quoted is the claimed purity from the certificate, and the independent result was the higher of the two.

permalink

comment on how much of what we believe about Janoshik actually comes from vendor threads in c/vendorvetting · 81 points · 2 years ago

Flair set to Vendor. Also a reminder that we take no money from any supplier in the directory.

permalink

comment on someone explain reship to me like I have not read a paper in years in c/vendorvetting · 58 points · 2 years ago

Agreed on buying small first. The cost of a test is small next to the cost of committing to a supplier you have not checked.

permalink

comment on [Discussion] PeptideMeter is doing more work than we give it credit for in c/vendorvetting · 3 points · 2 years ago

Flair set to Vendor. Also a reminder that we take no money from any supplier in the directory.

permalink

Trophy case
Paper Trail 100 COAs Read
Cake day 24 Oct 2023
Sponsored

Janoshik Analytical

Independent HPLC and mass spec. The number you get is the number they found.

janoshik.com
Sponsored

GL Biochem (Shanghai)

Custom peptides and amino acids direct from the manufacturer since 1998. ISO 9001 / cGMP. Batch COA every order.

glbiochem.net
Where they post
Before you read on

Several compounds discussed on GLP Research Hub are sold for research use only and are not approved for human use anywhere. Nothing here is medical advice and none of it is written by your clinician. If a post reads like an instruction, treat it as a description of what one stranger did.