Today a client told us: “I use TrustPointe because I know if it passed your testing, my product would pass any other lab it was sent to.” We talk about method validation and forced degradation, but that’s probably the simplest description of our value (and a high compliment).

There are no peptide resellers demonstrating content uniformity on their peptide batches today Clear differentiator, but only if your process is capable of meeting the high bar it represents

Well, USP <905> Content Uniformity on my RT10s from China FAILED A 🧵

Working on USP <1207> CCIT - Vacuum Decay. Machine is in the shop. Hoping to get down to 5um leak detection

Had our first testing order come through Peptaura’s group buy testing crypto payment tool Honestly pretty cool how frictionless it is. Money and order shows up, we test and upload the COA to the order, done.

🤔 Looks legit

We left dry retatrutide in a truck and on a sunny windowsill all summer. The fridge group got the VIP treatment. Then @TrustPointe tested the samples. High purity. Lower measured content outside the fridge. Randy brought receipts. 🐀👇 peptidecritic.com/lab-report…

you’re paying for testing on the good ones too. And you’re paying for the allocation of risk off yourself. You can legally buy research chems for yourself and not get in trouble at all. There is no fine for buying bpc 157 for research purposes for YOURSELF. The RUO brands assume the risk for buying the chems and selling them under a thin guise and pass off the cost to the consumer for doing so. The other alternative is to find a good Chinese plug and cut out the middle man but the downsides are very little of them do 3rd party testing and many have MOQs or “kits” The allocation of risk and testing demands a premium that RUO vendors can pass off to consumers. Simple economics really.

Any good LIMS recommendations? About to set a match to mine

I guess my point is that the less expensive labs are going to get more expensive Also there is an opportunity cost you are missing by not being able to sell product as your wait on testing

3-5 day turnaround is solid

heads up - while investigating another shop we found your freedom diagnostics COAs being reused with the client name changed to theirs and their product photo swapped in. the lab's search code still starts with "Blan" which is how it was caught. full writeup: peptigrity.com/discussions/h…

Updated our LIMS so USP <85> Bacterial Endotoxin reports in EU/vial instead of EU/ml going forward Just had to build in the calculation for the initial volume 🤓

Created a personal profile to move some of my unhinged rants there instead of on our business X account. Follow @JoshInProgress if interested

This is a summary of the the framework for impurities per ICH Q3: Reporting threshold: typically 0.05–0.1% for peptides (lower than small molecules’ 0.05% at low dose, but this varies by dose band) Identification threshold: where you must structurally characterize the impurity, typically in the 0.1–0.5% range depending on max daily dose Qualification threshold: where you need toxicological qualification (safety data, not just identity), often 0.5–1.0% for lower-dose peptides, tighter for high-dose/chronic products Individual specified impurities are usually held to tighter individual limits (often 0.5-1.0% each) while total impurities get a looser umbrella limit (often 2-5%, sometimes higher depending on the peptide’s synthetic complexity. Longer peptides accumulate more truncation/deletion species and can justify higher total impurity allowances if each is qualified).