Accepted answer
98.2 per cent purity with no content figure leaves the milligram number unmeasured. Purity says 98.2 of every 100 units of detected area is tirzepatide and 1.8 is something else. Content says how many milligrams are in the glass. The two do not constrain each other: a vial can be 98.2 per cent pure and still be under label, because water and counter-ion are part of the gross mass and neither shows up as an impurity peak. If you buy one test, buy the one that changes your arithmetic.
Stated carefully, the single most important distinction is between what purity measures — the fraction of detected material that is your target — and what you actually want to know — how much of the material in the vial is your target.
Temperature affects the dynamics of molecular conformation, and if a peptide has proline residues that interconvert on the chromatographic timescale, the peak will split or shoulder at low temperature and collapse at high temperature.
Column pore size affects mass transfer — a 100 Angstrom packing on a 5 kDa peptide restricts diffusion, broadening the peak and potentially hiding small impurities in the shoulders.
The ICH Q3A impurity thresholds and the relevant pharmacopoeial chapters all specify method validation requirements that almost no research-grade certificate claims to meet.
Worth noting that method standardisation is poor in the research-grade space compared to pharmaceutical work, so identical-looking methods can produce different results.
Compare purity within a single laboratory on the same method, never across laboratories.
edited 11 Jan 2026 by assay_blank — fixed an arithmetic slip in the third paragraph
I would gently push back on the second point — inter-laboratory spread is wider than stated. – lucia_marchetti 3 months ago Which wavelength was the purity integrated at? It changes the number more than people think. – tabular_nums 5 months ago add a comment