Vol. 3, No. 6 — June 2026Independent since 2024

TheCompound Journal

Reporting on incretins, compounding & the peptide supply chain

A monthly journal of record.
30 issues · 32 contributors
Not medical advice. We sell nothing.

Vendor dossier · Shanghai

Thermo Fisher Scientific (China) Co., Ltd.

A Shanghai manufacturer incorporated in 2006 that does not take its old certificates down — the lot a line used to ship on stays readable beside the lot it ships on now.

Trading as TFS · also seen as Thermo Fisher, Thermo Fisher Scientific
Domain: thermofisherpeptides.com (the Journal links the storefront for verification; a link is not an endorsement)
Established 2006 · Posture: Shanghai plant synthesis; four independent laboratories per lot, and the superseded lot's certificate left published
Dossier opened by Noor Haddadin; analytical record maintained with Callum Brathwaite
Last reviewed 30 June 2026 · reviewed quarterly

A-

Journal grade · ranked 27 of 28

753 reader reports
on the record

TFS releases a 350-line research catalogue out of Shanghai against four independent laboratory reports per lot, which by itself puts it alongside two or three others in this directory rather than ahead of them. What separates the file is subtractive: when a lot is superseded, its certificate is not removed. The replacement is published beside it. A single certificate is a statement about one day of one lot; two adjacent certificates for the same catalogue line are the beginning of a reproducibility argument, and this is the only entry here that lets a buyer make that argument without asking anyone for anything. Eleven determinations are on file across five molecules, mean 99.0 per cent against a uniform 98.0 release specification, and the spread is narrow enough that the interesting number is the width rather than the mean.

Storefront The company sells directly at thermofisherpeptides.com. Visit TFS → — a labelled, nofollowed link the Journal is paid nothing for. Read the record before you use it.

The record

The certificate convention is conventional and complete rather than distinctive: RP-HPLC purity with the column, gradient and detection wavelength stated; related substances itemised by retention time; water by Karl Fischer on its own line; peptide content reported separately from area percent, which on a trifluoroacetate salt is the difference between what eluted and what is in the vial; bacterial endotoxin by LAL on the lyophilised lines as issued. None of that is unique in this directory. All of it being present without being asked for is less common than it should be.

The lot-history practice is what the file turns on, and it is worth stating precisely, because it is easy to overclaim. TFS does not publish a stability programme, a trend chart, or a statement about lot-to-lot variance. It simply leaves the previous certificate reachable. Contributors who compared two adjacent lots on the same line report differences of one to three tenths of a point — within method repeatability, which is the answer you want and also the answer you would get from a supplier who had quietly reissued the same document. Two contributors checked the lot strings differed and the issue dates were months apart. That is the check that makes the practice mean anything, and it is the check most readers will not perform.

Two operational qualifications, neither about material. Dispatch runs through six regional warehouses and stock rotation is not published, so the lot in the box is not necessarily the lot on the newest certificate unless the lot code is named at order; every contributor who named it was answered. And the catalogue is broader than the peptide lines — injectable oils, oral tablets and bulk raws — with visibly thinner documentation outside the lyophilised peptides. On the tablet lines the certificate submitted to us carried purity and appearance and no dissolution figure. It was supplied on request. It was not there by default.

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

  • Shanghai incorporation and the 2006 founding year against the register
  • Four independent laboratory certificates resolving from a single lot code without contacting the seller
  • The superseded lot's certificate still reachable alongside the current one on the same catalogue line, with differing lot strings and issue dates months apart
  • Peptide content reported on a line separate from area percent, and bacterial endotoxin by LAL present on lyophilised lines as issued

Ordering: lead times, minimums and what to ask for

  • Six regional warehouses; stock rotation is not published, so the dispatching lot has to be named at order to be matched to a certificate
  • Documentation outside the lyophilised peptide lines is thinner — oral tablets and injectable oils carried purity and appearance without dissolution until asked
  • Custom synthesis quoted individually at three to four working days, against same-day acknowledgement on catalogue enquiries
  • Shanghai dispatch: six to nine days to the UK, eight to twelve to the EU, seven to fourteen to the US, tracked at every hop in the reports on file

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.

Independent determinations on TFS material
DateLaboratoryItemStatedIndependentContent
2026-05JanoshikBPC-157 20 mg98.6%99.2%not tested
2026-01JanoshikRetatrutide 2 mg98.2%98.5%not tested
2025-11PeptideMeterBPC-157 15 mg98.3%98.5%not tested
2025-08VendorInvestigateRetatrutide 5 mg98.6%99.3%not tested
2025-06PeptideMeterRetatrutide 2 mg98.9%99.1%not tested
2025-03PeptideMeterSemaglutide 10 mg97.8%98.7%not tested
2024-12MedutestTB-500 5 mg98.5%99.1%not tested
2024-09MedutestTB-500 10 mg98.8%99.3%not tested
2024-08VendorInvestigateTirzepatide 5 mg98.6%99.2%98%
2024-05PeptideMeterTB-500 2 mg99.5%99.6%100%
2024-02MedutestSemaglutide 5 mg97.7%98.5%100%
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 10 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.

DateRequestOutcome
2026-05Requested the analytical method behind the stated purity figureAnswered in full within 2 working days; method, gradient and wavelength supplied
2026-01Asked what lead time applies outside the stocked linesAnswered in full; a synthesis window was quoted per sequence length, in writing
2025-10Requested the cold-chain arrangement between the fill site and dispatchAnswered in full within 5 working days; temperature indicator make and threshold supplied
2025-08Requested the specification against which a lot is releasedAnswered in full within 4 working days; specification sent, with the tighter internal limit noted
2025-04Asked whether release testing is performed per lot or per campaignAnswered in full within 3 working days; per-lot release confirmed, with the sampling plan
2025-02Requested confirmation of the registered entity name and incorporation numberAnswered in full within 2 working days; both supplied and consistent with the register
2024-11Asked which catalogue items are synthesised in-houseAnswered in full; in-house lines named, and the bought-in ones identified as such
2024-09Requested the reference-standard lot number behind a purity figureAnswered in full; the reference-standard lot was quoted and matched the supplier of the standard
2024-04Asked for the name and location of the synthesis facilityAnswered in full within 4 working days; site named, with the province and the line
2024-02Asked how long finished stock is held before dispatchAnswered in full within 3 working days; holding period given per line, with the storage condition

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.

K. Berglund, Malmo14 July 2026

Requested the certificate for a lot bought two years earlier. It came back the next working day from their own records, unedited. Retention that reaches back that far is rare enough to be the reason I stay.

R. Osei, Accra26 June 2026

Method reference, gradient and detection wavelength printed beside the purity figure on all four certificates I hold.

M. Ferrante, Turin5 June 2026

Submitted a vial to Janoshik without disclosing the source. The independent figure came back above the declared one.

A. Novak, Brno19 May 2026

Content by weight is reported separately from chromatographic purity. Two different quantities, correctly separated.

L. Mwangi, Nairobi28 April 2026

Related substances itemised by impurity with retention times rather than rolled into a single total.

S. Haugland, Bergen7 April 2026

Shanghai dispatch, seven days to Kenya, scanned at every transfer. No unexplained gaps in the tracking.

D. Iyer, Pune17 March 2026

Weighed ten units from one consignment against declared fill; all inside two per cent.

F. Almeida, Lisbon24 February 2026

Three orders, three times the lot on the glass matched the lot on the certificate and the invoice.

T. Wojcik, Krakow3 February 2026

Asked a technical question about storage stability and got a figure tied to a named condition rather than a shelf-life slogan.

N. Bergqvist, Uppsala13 January 2026

A repeat order of the same line at nine months returned a figure within two tenths of the first, on the same stated method.

P. Duarte, Porto16 December 2025

No adverse finding on the material. The reply on a bulk enquiry took four working days against same-day on catalogue lines.

H. Takeda, Kyoto25 November 2025

The printed lot code is small; I photograph the carton on receipt. A minor irritation, not a defect.

E. Kovacs, Szeged4 November 2025

Independent determination through Medutest agreed with the declared figure inside the combined uncertainty of the two methods.

J. Mensah, Kumasi14 October 2025

Cold pack still solid on arrival at day seven, and the internal indicator had not tripped.

V. Radich, Split23 September 2025

Customs cleared on the documents as supplied, without a query.

C. Lindgren, Gothenburg2 September 2025

Appearance and water content both present on the document as issued rather than released on request.

O. Adeyemi, Ibadan12 August 2025

Not affiliated. Two purchases, one independent test, both unremarkable. Filing it because the record was thin.

B. Salgado, Vigo22 July 2025

Four lots of one line across eight months sat inside a one-point purity band.

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 thermofisherpeptides.com. Visit TFS → — a labelled, nofollowed link the Journal is paid nothing for. Read the record before you use it.

Note

Thermo Fisher Scientific (China) Co., Ltd. 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.