u/dilara_nyberg

The related substances profile is way more interesting than the main peak %. A 98% with 5 peaks is different from a 98% that is one 36% impurity.

Small correction: the trial was 4 weeks, not 6.

Counter-anecdote: opposite result, same dose. Which mostly tells us the variance is huge.

Not to be pedantic but purity and HPLC are being used interchangeably and they are not interchangeable in real life.

two labs, two different baselines, two different purity numbers, both honest

Came off after 4 weeks for financial reasons. Regained about a third over the following year. Back on now at a much lower dose.

the wiki is the source

Disagree on that part. 98.6% and 98.7% on the same vial is normal.

A shoulder on the main peak that 14 analysts integrated 5 different ways. Same trace, 98.9 spread.

The Medutest result being close to my own HPLC is the signal, not the absolute number. Both are right.

A shoulder on the main peak that 20 analysts integrated 9 different ways. Same trace, 98.0 spread.

Not convinced. The evidence does not support that reading.

nobody posts about this part and it is the longest part

chromatogram or it did not happen

Detection wavelength? method development and that changes at different wavelengths.

chromatogram or it did not happen

Respectfully this is a sample of one presented as a finding.

a round-robin on baseline integration would be genuinely useful

two labs, two different baselines, two different purity numbers, both honest

Ran the same vial on two columns, different purity, both right, different separation. Method matters more than equipment.

Yeah, the chromatogram profile matters more than the headline number.

Disagree on that part. 93.7% and 99.3% on the same vial is normal.

integration decision on a shoulder changes your number by half a point on its own