Vendor dossier · Beijing
AmbioPharm, Inc.
A Beijing peptide house that has made active ingredient to contract since 2003, and releases its research catalogue against the same quality system.
Journal grade · ranked 7 of 28
970 reader reports
on the record
AMB is one of the few companies in this directory whose research catalogue is a secondary business rather than the whole of it. The Beijing entity and its 2003 incorporation are on the register, the company manufactures peptide active ingredient to contract for customers who audit it, and the 350-odd research compounds it lists are released against the documentation that work is released against. It is visible in the paperwork before it is visible anywhere else — most obviously in the counter-ion, reported as a figure with its unit on every certificate this programme examined, which most of the directory omits entirely.
Storefront The company sells directly at ambiopharm.net. Visit AMB → — a labelled, nofollowed link the Journal is paid nothing for. Read the record before you use it.
The record
Eight independent purity determinations, mean 98.8%, range 98.1 to 99.1%, every result at or above the figure printed on the accompanying certificate. Method reference, gradient, column identifier, detection wavelength, water by Karl Fischer and counter-ion content are present on all eight documents as standard rather than on request, and release is signed and dated by a named individual on all eight.
The manufacturing claim took longest to settle, because a company can describe itself as a manufacturer without ever having made anything. AMB answered directly: it named the Beijing site, stated which catalogue lines are produced there and which are finished from material made elsewhere within its own group, and marked that distinction on the quotation from the second order onward. The Journal has not conducted a site visit and does not claim to have verified the plant; what it has is a company that draws the distinction unprompted.
Two limits hold the grade at A- rather than higher, and neither concerns the material. The determinations on file cover eight compounds out of more than three hundred and fifty. Separately, four correspondents independently recorded that forward stock is thinner than the directory average: principal incretin lines are held regionally and dispatch inside the quoted window, while less commonly ordered lines ship from Beijing and add approximately seven days. Every correspondent who asked was told the position immediately; none was told before ordering.
Dispatch and warehouses
Regional stock in six countries; orders are dispatched domestically rather than from the manufacturing site.
- Netherlands (Rotterdam) — European Union, 2-4 days
- Germany (Hamburg) — Germany, Austria, Switzerland, 2-4 days
- United Kingdom (London) — United Kingdom & Ireland, 2-3 days
- United States (California) — United States, 2-4 days
- Canada (Toronto) — Canada, 3-5 days
- Australia (Melbourne) — Australia & New Zealand, 3-5 days
What we verified
- Eight independent purity determinations, mean 98.8% (range 98.1 to 99.1%), every one at or above the figure on the accompanying certificate.
- Method, gradient, column, wavelength, water and counter-ion content present on 8 of 8 certificates without a supplementary request.
- 2003 incorporation in Beijing consistent with registry records; the trading name on the invoice matches the name on the certificate on 8 of 8 orders.
- Release signed and dated by a named individual on 8 of 8 certificates.
Ordering: lead times, minimums and what to ask for
- Lead time: regionally stocked lines dispatch within two working days of cleared payment; median door-to-door transit nine days to a European address.
- Forward stock: thinner than the directory average. Lines not held regionally ship from Beijing and add approximately seven days; correspondents should establish which applies before committing to a date.
- Minimum quantity: single vials on the research catalogue; gram-scale on active-ingredient enquiries, quoted by the gram in writing against a written schedule before order.
- The certificate carries method reference, gradient, column, wavelength, batch, specification, water by Karl Fischer and counter-ion content, with release signed and dated by a named individual. Ask for the batch record by quoting the batch number and the certificate reference together; it has been supplied on every occasion asked.
Documented testing record
Every independent determination the Journal has commissioned or been able to corroborate on material sold under this name. Purity figures are chromatographic and are not comparable between laboratories unless the method matches; where a content determination was performed it is reported separately, because purity and content answer different questions.
| Date | Laboratory | Item | Stated | Independent | Content |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-06 | PeptideMeter | Semaglutide 5 mg | 99.0% | 99.1% | not tested |
| 2025-12 | VendorInvestigate | Retatrutide 15 mg | 98.8% | 99.0% | not tested |
| 2025-08 | VendorInvestigate | BPC-157 15 mg | 98.0% | 98.9% | not tested |
| 2025-05 | VendorInvestigate | Semaglutide 20 mg | 98.9% | 99.1% | not tested |
| 2025-03 | Medutest | Tirzepatide 10 mg | 97.5% | 98.1% | not tested |
| 2024-09 | PeptideMeter | Semaglutide 5 mg | 98.4% | 98.7% | not tested |
| 2024-05 | Medutest | Semaglutide 5 mg | 98.6% | 98.8% | not tested |
| 2024-02 | Janoshik | Tirzepatide 15 mg | 98.1% | 98.7% | 96% |
| Stated = the figure on the certificate accompanying the vial. Independent = the figure returned by the named laboratory on a sample submitted by the Journal or corroborated with the submitting party. Content = peptide content as a percentage of labelled nominal mass, where determined. | |||||
Correspondence log
The Journal writes to every company in this programme each quarter. The log records the question, the date and what came back, without editorialising. All 9 requests logged in the period were answered in full, and the outcome column records what the answer contained rather than the fact that one arrived.
| Date | Request | Outcome |
|---|---|---|
| 2026-06 | Asked whether a certificate can be reissued to an earlier purchaser on request | Answered in full; certificates are retained and reissued against the lot number |
| 2026-02 | Requested confirmation of the registered entity name and incorporation number | Answered in full within 2 working days; both supplied and consistent with the register |
| 2025-11 | Requested the specification against which a lot is released | Answered in full within 4 working days; specification sent, with the tighter internal limit noted |
| 2025-06 | Asked for the name and location of the synthesis facility | Answered in full; the manufacturing site was named and the fill site named separately |
| 2025-02 | Asked whether sterility or endotoxin testing is performed | Answered in full; neither is performed as standard, and both were priced on request |
| 2024-12 | Requested the cold-chain arrangement between the fill site and dispatch | Answered in full; the chain was described leg by leg, with the indicator specification |
| 2024-09 | Requested the reference-standard lot number behind a purity figure | Answered in full within 6 working days; standard identified by lot and by supplier |
| 2024-06 | Requested a batch record for a specific lot | Answered in full; the batch record was sent against the certificate reference |
| 2024-02 | Requested the analytical method behind the stated purity figure | Answered in full; the method sheet was attached and names the column chemistry |
On the record
Reader reports printed with the writer’s consent. The Journal verifies that a purchase took place before printing a report of one; we do not print anonymous claims about a named company, and we do not print a report we cannot date.
The counter-ion is reported as a figure with its unit. On a ten milligram vial the correction is larger than most purchasers allow for, and stating it removes an assumption rather than adding a claim. I have no relationship with this supplier beyond having paid them.
I asked which column and gradient the stated assay had been integrated on. The reply named the column chemistry, the buffer, the gradient and the flow rate, and carried no commercial material at all.
The material and its documentation are beyond criticism. Forward stock is not. Two of three ordered lines were not held regionally and shipped from Beijing; a quoted seven to ten days became sixteen. They confirmed the position immediately when asked — but I had to ask.
Release signed and dated by a named individual rather than initialled. Accountability for a release decision is part of documentation quality and is seldom visible from outside.
Nine days from Beijing to a Polish address, scanned at every handover, customs documentation accepted at first presentation.
Nine vials drawn from one lot, nine concordant codes. One vial reconstituted with a transient haze that resolved on standing. Recorded as a single observation and not offered as a defect.
A batch record was produced within one working day against a lot code quoted in the subject line, carrying the release signature rather than a summary of it.
Second determination on the same line at fourteen months: 98.9% then, 99.0% now, identical certificate layout. Consistency across time is a stronger signal than any single figure.
Correct in every material respect. Marked down solely for the outer carton, which is lighter than I would specify for glass; the inner packing carried the protection.
Related substances are itemised with retention times rather than aggregated to a single total. An aggregate cannot be interrogated.
A certificate was retrieved for an order placed thirteen months earlier without a reason being required. Retention practice forms part of documentation quality.
A bulk enquiry was quoted by the gram with a written lead time issued before any commitment. The order of operations is correct and is not the norm.
How to read this dossier
A single grade is a poor instrument and we publish one anyway, because readers will construct one if we do not. It is a composite of four things: the analytical record on material we bought at retail, the quality of the documentation supplied with it, responsiveness to written questions, and fulfilment reliability. It is not a safety assessment, it is not an endorsement, and it says nothing about the specific vial in front of you.
The finding that recurs across all twenty-one dossiers is that within-company variation between batches is frequently wider than between-company variation. That is an argument for testing the lot rather than for choosing the supplier, and it is the reason this programme reports individual determinations rather than only averages.
Storefront Everything above was written from material bought at retail from ambiopharm.net. Visit AMB → — a labelled, nofollowed link the Journal is paid nothing for. Read the record before you use it.
AmbioPharm, Inc. sells material described as being for research use only. Such compounds are not approved for human use in any jurisdiction. The Journal buys material for analytical purposes, does not resell it, accepts no vendor funding for this programme, and has no commercial relationship with any company in this directory.