About
The testing has run since 2019. It started with dietary supplements, where the question was almost always the same one: does the capsule contain what the label says, and what else is in it. Peptides and other actives came later, and they are now the larger part of the work.
The name is newer than the work. The laboratory has traded as ANALYTON since 2026, and before that under a different name and through a different company. Neither change interrupted the testing, and saying so is cheaper than letting someone find the gap and draw their own conclusion from it.
| Identity | Measured mass against theoretical, difference in daltons |
| Purity | Area normalisation at 214 nm, chromatogram attached |
| Content | Net peptide content in percent and milligrams per vial |
| Method | Named by the compendial chapter it was run under |
| Evidence | Raw data retained five years, reissued on request |
The work began in 2019 with dietary supplements, and for a long time with nothing else. Supplements are a good place to learn the trade because the failure modes are unglamorous and constant: a label claim that overstates the active by a third, a botanical extract standardised against a marker compound that is not the active one, a capsule blend that is uniform in the mixer and not in the tenth capsule off the line.
Almost none of that is exotic chemistry. It is assay against a certified reference standard, content uniformity across ten units, elemental impurities, and microbial enumeration reported as counts rather than as a pass. What it teaches is matrix work: excipients, fillers and botanical background co-extract, suppress ionisation and co-elute, and a number obtained without demonstrating recovery in the actual formulation is not a result.
Peptides arrived as an extension of the same question asked of a harder matrix, and they brought a failure mode supplements do not have. A supplement that is 30 percent short is short. A peptide reported at 99 percent purity can be 78 percent peptide by mass and entirely consistent with its own certificate, because the counter-ion and the water are invisible to the measurement that produced the figure.
That gap is why the reporting standard on this site insists on identity by measured mass and content in milligrams. It is not a marketing position. It is the thing the earlier work made impossible to ignore.
| 2019 | Dietary supplements — label claim, content uniformity, elemental impurities, microbial quality |
| Then | Research peptides — identity by mass, chromatographic purity, net peptide content, counter-ion and water |
| Then | Cosmetic actives — concentration in the finished emulsion, preservative efficacy, metals from pigments |
| Alongside | Parenteral safety — bacterial endotoxins, microbial enumeration, sterility, residual solvents |
The testing operation has run since 2019. It was previously carried on through a different company and under a different name, and neither change interrupted it. The laboratory has traded as ANALYTON since 2026.
Identity is confirmed by mass, not by retention time
LC-MS is part of the base analysis rather than a paid addition. Co-elution with a standard is corroboration; a measured mass is identification.
Content is reported, not inferred from purity
Net peptide content sits in the base analysis. A purity figure alone systematically overstates how much active material a client received, by twenty points or more.
Tests are called by the chapter they were run under
Enumeration is not sterility. A screening technique is not a compliance method. A detection limit is a number with a unit.
The method scope, the reporting specification and the naming rules set out on the report page are settled, and the price list is published with the basis for every line printed beside it. Instrument capability is held to a fixed set of requirements: LC-MS rather than retention time alone for identity, ICP-MS rather than X-ray fluorescence for elemental impurities, kinetic endotoxin determination, microbial enumeration and sterility treated as the separate tests they are, and combustion or amino acid analysis for peptide content.
Turnaround times and numerical detection limits are not published here. Both are properties of a validated method on a specific matrix rather than of a laboratory in general, and both are stated in writing on the quotation for the determinations actually ordered. Publishing a single catalogue figure would be tidier and less true.
Manufacturers, distributors and brands are welcome to make contact. A quotation needs the compound or product, the matrix it is in, the determinations wanted and the number of units.
| Accreditation | Not claimed |
| Turnaround | On quotation |
| Detection limits | After method validation |
| Prices | Published |
| Report verification | Live |
ANALYTON analyses material submitted to it and reports what was measured. It takes no position on whether a substance may lawfully be supplied, imported or used in any jurisdiction, and a certificate is not evidence that it may.
Results are analytical measurements. They are not medical, clinical or toxicological assessments, they do not constitute a marketing authorisation, and they must not be presented as a safety endorsement of the material.
Clinical and diagnostic specimens are outside scope and are not accepted.
Confidentiality
Nothing is published without the client's instruction. Where a client elects to publish, the record resolves against ANALYTON and cannot be edited afterwards, which is the point of publishing it.
A result that comes back badly is still the client's result. It is issued unchanged, and it is not withheld, softened or renegotiated.