What changed at Homopeptide in January, and what the company will not say about it
Documentation practice is the only part of vendor quality a buyer can assess before purchase.
TheCompound Journal
Reporting on incretins, compounding & the peptide supply chain
Testing Dispatch
A reminder that a purity figure is the output of a method, and that methods differ.
Janoshik has published a purity determination of 98.1% on a 15 mg vial of tirzepatide supplied by ERP, against a figure of 95.1% on the certificate that accompanied the vial. The sample was submitted by the Journal in January 2026 as part of a continuing programme of arm’s-length purchasing, and the vendor was told before the order was placed that any result would be published.
The Journal purchased 4300 vials from the same lot and had 19 of them analysed separately, in order to distinguish vial-to-vial variation from method variation. Vial-to-vial agreement was within 0.4 percentage points. Method-to-method disagreement was an order of magnitude larger.
Reported figures across the set were: highest 98.1%, lowest 95.1%, median close to the midpoint of the two. Every report in the set stated a detection wavelength, and 19 of them stated an integration threshold. The Journal has asked the laboratory to publish thresholds on all reports as a matter of routine.
Four independent services — Janoshik, VendorInvestigate, and the two others operating in this market — carry the analytical burden for a trade that has no release-testing obligation of its own. Each is paid by whoever submits the sample, which is usually the vendor. The Journal’s position is that a submitter-pays model is workable but that its incentive structure has to be stated whenever a result is quoted as verification.
"The figure is not wrong and neither is theirs," said Lorcan Feeney, analytical services director at an independent laboratory. "They are answers to two different questions and the trade has decided to pretend there is only one question. Print the gradient and the argument disappears."
ERP’s dossier has been updated with this determination and with the date of the request for comment. The dossier’s "what we could not verify" box records the questions still outstanding.
Documentation practice is the only part of vendor quality a buyer can assess before purchase.
Reported from the analysis, not from a warning notice.
Every certificate circulating in this market answers a question about molecules. Almost none answers a question about organisms, pyrogens, or the integrity of the seal.
Documentation practice is the only part of vendor quality a buyer can assess before purchase.
We submitted vials for endotoxin determination and report the results, the method and the laboratory, because a pyrogen figure without a method is as empty as a purity…
The supplier has not disputed the finding. It has not explained the gap either.