Lab results

Every third-party purity result we hold, listed with the laboratory, the report number, the batch and the date it was issued. Seventeen of our thirty-one products have one. Fourteen do not, and both lists are below.

The readable documents are sent by email on request. The previews on this page are deliberately blurred, and further down we say plainly why, and exactly how the blurring works.

All of that is on this page in text, unblurred. The purity, the laboratory, the report number, the batch and the date are the parts you would actually check. Nothing in the table is hidden.

Name the compound and we will send the report we hold. If you have already ordered, include your order number and we will send the report for the exact lot that went in your parcel, matched through the batch reference printed on your packing slip.

There is no password, no account and no waiting list. One message, and a person answers it.

Two things, and we would rather give you both than let you assume.

Why. These reports carry information about who manufactures for us. Posting seventeen of them openly hands our supply chain to every competitor in the category, and this is a category where a Québec seller was permanently enjoined by a court in June 2026 and three others have had their websites taken down. We are willing to send a report to anyone who asks. We are not willing to publish the supply chain to nobody in particular.

How, exactly. The previews above are not a readable image with a blur effect over the top. Each one was downscaled to 260 pixels wide first, which throws the detail away, and then blurred, and then saved at low quality. The result is between two and three kilobytes, against sources of 160 to 260 kilobytes.

That distinction matters, so here it is plainly: a blur applied in CSS is undone by deleting one line in your browser’s inspector, and the readable file is one click away in the page source. Ours is not that. The blurred pixels are the only pixels that exist here. There is no sharper version on this server to find, because the readable certificates were never uploaded to it.

We are telling you how it works because a site that criticises other people’s fake verification should not run any of its own.

Named, because a list of what we have is only useful next to a list of what we do not.

5-Amino-1MQ, Bacteriostatic Water, Cagrilintide, Cerebrolysin, CJC-1295 without DAC, DSIP, GLOW Blend, HGH, Ipamorelin, Melanotan 2, Selank, Semaglutide, Tesamorelin and Tirzepatide.

Every one of those product pages says “not tested” in those words. We do not quote a manufacturer’s own purity claim as though it were independent, and we do not put a badge where a certificate should be. They are with the laboratory, and as each result comes back the product page gets the figure, the laboratory and the batch.

Every figure in the table above is an HPLC assay measuring identity and purity in the sample the laboratory tested. That is the whole of what it says.

It does not cover sterility, endotoxin, heavy metals, residual solvents, microbial content, or safety in anything living. None of our products is tested for those and none is supplied sterile. A compound can be 99% pure and completely unsuitable for anything but laboratory work.

Health Canada’s advisory of 9 April 2026 lists the risks it associates with unauthorised injectable peptides, and a purity result speaks to none of them. The FAQs go through this in detail, and the research use disclaimer is the condition every order is placed under.

We would rather you heard this from us.

The KLOW certificate is titled with all four compounds and reports 99.63%, but its identity block reads CAS 49557-75-7 at 403.93 Da, with a mass spectrometry line confirming a single species. Those are GHK-Cu’s identity fields, character for character. A four-compound blend cannot have one CAS number. The CJC-1295 and Ipamorelin certificate has the same problem, carrying only CJC-1295’s identity data.

We have asked the laboratory what was actually analysed. Until they answer, we do not claim either blend was assayed as a finished blend, and the blends page says so.

Both certificates are still in the table above, with their real numbers, because hiding them would be worse than publishing them with the caveat attached.

Our Medutest certificates print a web address for checking the report.

We requested five of them, including one code we invented. All five returned identical pages, down to the same file size and the same checksum. A fabricated code produces the same result as a real one.

We still name the laboratory, the report number and the batch, because that is more than a bare percentage. We will not point you at a verification button that verifies nothing. It is the same reason the previews on this page are blurred in the pixels rather than in a stylesheet.

BPC-157 was showing 99.35% across thirteen surfaces on this site. The certificate says 99.781%. Semax was showing 98.99%, which is actually TB-500’s figure. The certificate says 98.59%.

Both are corrected, and both correct figures are in the table above. We mention it because a store that has never found an error in its own numbers has probably never looked.