What testing labs do we currently trust?
-
@dispensarysupport test results I would think.
@dispensarysupport test results I would think.
nice 30k ft view but how do we tell who is "best"? Like if we just want all of our tests results to come in at 99.5% or better we are best to use Freedom I feel. If we want legit critically tested product that we may or may not use on our very own lab rats, I want an unbiased lab that will give it to me straight with no bullshit.
-
@mikebricker I have a sneaky suspicion that that article may be turned on its head in the near future. By the way, I have no horse in this race i just want to see labs do their job and test at a high level. If Krause is accurate with their testing I am all for spending 60-70pct less. No Vanguard is interesting in that article and Freedom while we all know about them. Essentially an AI produced article with a ranking based on nothing. The author simply could have used each lab and tested vials from the same batch and compared results. Maybe we will see someone do that in the near future. hmmmm
@mikebricker I have a sneaky suspicion that that article may be turned on its head in the near future. By the way, I have no horse in this race i just want to see labs do their job and test at a high level. If Krause is accurate with their testing I am all for spending 60-70pct less. No Vanguard is interesting in that article and Freedom while we all know about them. Essentially an AI produced article with a ranking based on nothing. The author simply could have used each lab and tested vials from the same batch and compared results. Maybe we will see someone do that in the near future. hmmmm
But again, who are we going to decide is RIGHT if we send the same product from a kit to all the labs? The only way to ensure they get the same product is to literally have them all taking product to test from the same vial. I think even lately we have seen that different vials in the same kit can give varying results.
-
-
@dispensarysupport I have a feeling we may be getting our answer on which labs we can trust pretty soon based on actual testing.
-
@mitchmiller it is valid because they are ISO accredited - that's what that means and they DO NOT have a peptide scope- as shown on the chart. No one is accredited for peptides.
-
also some light reading.
https://peptidecritic.com/lab-report/horizon-analytical-and-case-missing-third-party
https://peptidecritic.com/lab-report/ils-labs-cant-fill-out-pdf-please-trust-science
https://peptidecritic.com/lab-report/ils-labs-finds-100-pure-retatrutide-chemistry-can-go-home-now
https://peptidecritic.com/lab-report/accumark-lab-selling-transparency-forgot-explain-who-they-are
https://peptidecritic.com/lab-report/9977-mots-c-100-good-boy-ils-labs-issues-certificate-animalysis
https://peptidecritic.com/lab-report/sterigenix-analytical-fast-coas-missing-basics -
Krause Analytical. They have been bad mouthed here by some with 2nd or 3rd party semi-negative comments. None that I’ve seen were first hand knowledge. Below is from a SubStack article ranking testing labs. Krause was ranked 5th, above Kovera, ILS, and TrustPoint.
——————————————————-
Krause Analytical has established a strong reputation for peptide identity, purity and quantitative testing, becoming a familiar name within the independent research peptide community.Although it maintains a lower public profile than some of the higher-ranked laboratories, its reports appear regularly across the market and its services remain closely aligned with the practical needs of peptide researchers and suppliers.
Its visibility is also enhanced through its role as one of the independent analytical laboratories used by the Finnrick testing platform, extending the reach of its analytical work to a broader community of researchers seeking third-party verification.
Rather than relying on a highly visible public brand, Krause has built its reputation through consistent analytical performance, steady market adoption and its contribution to independent peptide testing.
Current assessment: A dependable peptide-focused laboratory with growing recognition, consistent market adoption and an important role in supporting independent peptide verification.
@mikebricker Krause results vary by who was running the lab that day.
Send them the same batch of reta 3 weeks apart and you get a 20-30% difference in mass. They usually test lower on mass numbers than most labs. Their entire identity is around finnrick which is an entirely different discussion.
-
@mikebricker Krause results vary by who was running the lab that day.
Send them the same batch of reta 3 weeks apart and you get a 20-30% difference in mass. They usually test lower on mass numbers than most labs. Their entire identity is around finnrick which is an entirely different discussion.
@Randy Thanks. I’ve seen the past complaints about the mass differences. And my peps always seem to be about 5 to 10% low in mass. So a 10mg posted will come back 9.3 to 9.7mg. But they do ID correctly and give purity correctly. And they’re consistent with mass.
When you guys ran mass through the various labs weren’t the differences well over 10%? -
@Randy Thanks. I’ve seen the past complaints about the mass differences. And my peps always seem to be about 5 to 10% low in mass. So a 10mg posted will come back 9.3 to 9.7mg. But they do ID correctly and give purity correctly. And they’re consistent with mass.
When you guys ran mass through the various labs weren’t the differences well over 10%? -
@Randy exactly, a low of 10.1mg and a high of 12.9mg. That’s over a 20% differential….
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login