raises a completely valid point and I want to be clear: this compilation is PURITY data only. It tells us the peptide is what it claims to be at the concentration it claims. It does NOT tell us about sterility, endotoxins, or other contaminants. That said, we do have 3 endotoxin tests in the community: - Batch TZ-2025-1022: 0.8 EU/mL (passing, limit is <5 EU/mL) - Batch TZ-2025-1189: 1.2 EU/mL (passing) - Batch TZ-2026-0015: 0.5 EU/mL (passing) Small sample size but encouraging. I'd love to see more people add the endotoxin panel ($85 add-on at Janoshik).

Incredible resource. I've been lurking for weeks trying to decide on a vendor and this data is what's pushing me toward QSC. The transparency and community verification here is unlike anything I've seen for other vendors. Question: is there a similar compilation for any other vendor? I'm also considering GGPeps and would love to see side-by-side data.

I have a smaller GGPeps compilation — only 11 tests so far (they're newer to the scene). Their tirz averages 96.8% and sema 95.2%. Solid numbers but the sample size is too small to draw strong conclusions yet. I'll post a GGPeps-specific compilation once I hit 20+ data points. For now, QSC has the deepest testing pool by far. It's the most "proven" option from a data perspective. That doesn't mean other vendors are bad — just less verified. 📋

Just want to chime in and say this compilation has been invaluable. When I got my 98.7% result I was able to immediately compare it against 50+ other results to see where it fell. That context matters. Everyone: if you send a sample to Janoshik, PLEASE share your results (positive OR negative) with Dave for the spreadsheet. The more data points we have, the better decisions we can all make. This is harm reduction through data. 🔬