Public COA audit
IGF-LR3 · IGF-1 LR3
Audited September 5, 2026
Multiple signals on this document conflict with known lab formats or verification patterns.
- Legitimacy
- 15
- Confidence
- 88%
- Panels
- 1/7
Scored poorly because audit signals point to fabrication or reused paperwork, limited panel coverage (1/7), 3 critical findings, and notable note: "Target compound not detected". To improve: replace this file with an original lab certificate that verifies on the lab portal and include identity, purity, and endotoxin at minimum.
Document details
Fields extracted from the certificate — not order or payment data.
- Batch / lot
- IGF1N071125
- Identity method
- Assessment of a peptide vial or vials
- Sample date
- 2025-07-21
- Issue date
- 2025-07-23
Original certificate
Embedded copy of the stored COA PDF or image. Download it for your records — PeptIQ’s audit is separate from the lab document itself.
7-panel checklist
Had data + good, had data + bad, reported without pass/fail, or missing. Missing lowers thoroughness — you decide whether that panel matters; PeptIQ’s score still factors coverage.
1 of 7 present · 0 passed · 1 failed · 0 reported · 6 missing
Missing is a thoroughness gap — not automatically bad. PeptIQ’s legitimacy score still weighs panel coverage; you can down-weight panels that don’t matter for your use case.
Identity
Tested · failed · core
Compound identity confirmed (e.g. HPLC, mass spec).
not detected
Purity
Not on this certificate file · core
Reported purity percentage for the analyte.
No evidence on this file. Vendors sometimes publish separate purity and endotoxin reports for the same lot — check the brand page before treating this as “never tested.”
Heavy metals
Not on this certificate file
Lead, arsenic, cadmium, mercury, or similar limits.
No evidence on this file. Vendors sometimes publish separate purity and endotoxin reports for the same lot — check the brand page before treating this as “never tested.”
Microbial
Not on this certificate file
Bioburden / microbial limits testing.
No evidence on this file. Vendors sometimes publish separate purity and endotoxin reports for the same lot — check the brand page before treating this as “never tested.”
Endotoxin
Not on this certificate file · core
LAL or chromogenic endotoxin assay.
No evidence on this file. Vendors sometimes publish separate purity and endotoxin reports for the same lot — check the brand page before treating this as “never tested.”
Sterility
Not on this certificate file
Sterility testing where applicable.
No evidence on this file. Vendors sometimes publish separate purity and endotoxin reports for the same lot — check the brand page before treating this as “never tested.”
Residual solvent / water
Not on this certificate file
Residual solvents or water content limits.
No evidence on this file. Vendors sometimes publish separate purity and endotoxin reports for the same lot — check the brand page before treating this as “never tested.”
How to read this
Had data · good
Panel present with a pass (or clear acceptance).
Had data · bad
Panel present with a fail — a concrete quality signal.
Had data · unclear
Value reported without an explicit pass/fail mark.
Missing on this file
Not on this certificate file. Lowers file thoroughness; a sibling endotoxin/purity report for the same lot may still exist. PeptIQ’s score still factors coverage.
Findings
Evidence-linked observations from this audit.
Target compound not detected
The report states IGF-1 LR3 was 'not detected' in the sample, meaning the vial does not contain the claimed peptide. This is a complete failure of identity verification.
Contamination with multiple other peptides
Comments section indicates other peptides were detected: GHRP-2, tesamorelin, ipamorelin and MGF. The sample contains wrong compounds entirely.
Suspicious report structure
This appears to be a Janoshik-style report, but the result presentation is highly unusual. Legitimate Janoshik reports typically show quantitative purity data, chromatograms, and detailed analytical methods. This report only states 'not detected' with no supporting analytical data.
No purity data provided
No HPLC purity percentage or chromatogram is included. For a peptide analysis, this is a fundamental omission that makes the report incomplete for quality assessment.
Verification key provided but authenticity uncertain
While a verification URL and unique key (MNK8G9HGQX8B) are provided, the unusual format and missing analytical data raise questions about whether this is a genuine Janoshik report or a fabrication using their template.
Batch number present
Batch IGF1N071125 is clearly stated.
Dates are reasonable and sequential
Testing ordered 2025-07-15, sample received 2025-07-21, analysis conducted 2025-07-23. All dates are sequential and in the past relative to 2026-09-05.
Timing & next steps
Practical follow-ups based on document age and gaps.
coa age
This COA was issued over a year ago (409 days) — consider whether a retest is warranted for this batch.
PeptIQ COA reports analyze document content and publicly verifiable lab signals. They are educational and not a guarantee of product quality, legality, or safety. Always consult a qualified professional before making health decisions. We never publish purchase prices, shipping details, or uploader identity.