Newer compounds sometimes have thinner public reference data than the old standbys. When you get a COA for something like Retatrutide, what do you actually look at first?
For me: the HPLC area-percent purity, then whether mass spec confirms the expected mass, then the named impurities. But I'd love to hear how the more analytical folks here triage a fresh COA on a less-documented molecule.
Your order is right. I'd only add: read the method before the purity number on a less-documented compound. A purity figure with no column/mobile-phase block behind it isn't a figure I trust yet.
For a newer molecule the mass-spec identity confirmation matters even more than usual, because there's less community reference data to sanity-check against. Identity first, then admire the purity number.
Both noted — so the triage becomes: method, then identity (mass), then purity area-percent, then named impurities. That's a cleaner order than I started with.
Want to join the discussion?
Log in to reply