🍪 CompoundTalk 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 TestingParticulate matter testing — 6 month update Page 2

Particulate matter testing — 6 month update

SarahChen_PharmD Tue, Jan 23, 2024 at 2:09 AM 14 replies 1,992 viewsPage 2 of 3
steph_laguna
Member
234
1,123
Nov 2024
Laguna Beach, CA
Jan 23, 2024 at 4:59 AM#6

I'll vouch for Janoshik's reliability. I've sent split samples — same vial, tested both at Janoshik and at a CLIA-certified US lab. Results were within 2% of each other on potency (HPLC). That's well within inter-laboratory variability.

The turnaround time can be slow during their busy periods (after holidays, etc.) but results have always been thorough. Their reports include full chromatograms, peak integration data, and a clear pass/fail assessment. 📈

28 14Dr.EndoEP, GraceAZ_72, carl_compliance and 25 others
Reply Quote Save Share Report
ben_calgary
Member
245
1,123
Oct 2024
Calgary, CA
Jan 23, 2024 at 5:16 AM#7

OK so let me do the math on whether testing is "worth it":

  • Janoshik full panel: ~$130
  • International shipping: ~$55
  • Sample cost (0.5mL of my $150 vial): ~$37.50
  • Total cost of testing: ~$222.50

My monthly compounded sema cost: $150. So testing one batch costs more than one month of medication. Is it worth it for every batch? Probably not. But for your first batch from a new pharmacy? Absolutely. Test once to establish trust, then periodically retest (maybe every 3-6 months) to verify consistency.

47 17CanadaChris, ZaraB_AL, JakeSmashed95 and 44 others
Reply Quote Save Share Report
NicoleRaleigh
Member
356
1,567
Aug 2024
Raleigh, NC
Jan 23, 2024 at 5:33 AM#8

That makes sense — test the first batch and then spot-check occasionally. I'm going to submit my sample this week. Will report back with results!

One more thing — should I tell my pharmacy I'm sending their product for third-party testing? Or is that going to cause issues?

39 19COA_Karl, MikeFit_NJ, InsuranceTom and 36 others
Reply Quote Save Share Report

Sigma-Aldrich — Research-Grade Standards

Certified reference materials, analytical reagents, and research-grade standards for peptide verification. Trusted by laboratories worldwide.

Shop Reference Standards
SurmountFan_IN
Member
789
3,456
May 2024
Indianapolis, IN
Jan 23, 2024 at 5:50 AM#9

You don't have to tell them, and honestly it's better if you don't — at least not before you get results. If they know you're testing, a bad actor could selectively send you a "good" batch next time. Test first, then share results with them if you want to see their response.

A pharmacy that's confident in their product will welcome third-party verification. One that gets defensive or tries to discredit the testing lab? That tells you everything. 🎯

Last edited: Jan 23, 2024 at 6:50 AM
40 22rachel_ABQ, traveltech_sara, AttorneyGrant and 37 others
Reply Quote Save Share Report
SteveThurs
Member
523
2,345
Sep 2024
Wisconsin
Online
Jan 23, 2024 at 6:07 AM#10

One last pro tip: when you get your results, share them here (anonymized if you want). Community-sourced testing data is one of the most valuable resources we have. Every data point helps everyone make better decisions. We maintain a community testing database spreadsheet — link is in the sidebar — where members voluntarily contribute their results. Over 200 entries so far across multiple pharmacies.

Knowledge is power. Test your stuff. 💪🔬

1 9TomTeleRx
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