Two peptides, one vial, and a report you can follow sample by sample. Panda’s CJC-1295 (no DAC) + Ipamorelin documentation includes individual component amounts, three-vial results, and a direct ILS laboratory verification record.
When you compare a 5mg + 5mg blend, a single percentage is only one part of the picture. The useful questions are concrete: which components does the report identify, how much combined peptide content does it report, and which results belong to which vial? Here is a worked example using the original report for lot PP2605-008.
The source behind this example
- Material: CJC-1295 no DAC + Ipamorelin, labeled 5mg + 5mg in one vial; 10mg combined labeled content.
- Laboratory and report: ILS Laboratories,
COA-2026--D_Y5P. - Lot and analysis date: PP2605-008; September 16, 2026.
- Sampling shown: Dedicated V0, Conformity V1, and Conformity V2.
Read the complete five-page laboratory verification record (PDF). The tables below reproduce its reported values; they are not a new certificate or additional testing.
1. Start with what “5mg + 5mg” describes
In this listing, the two labeled amounts describe the components of one blended vial, not two separate vials and not 10mg of each peptide. Quantity 1 means one vial. The supplied material is lyophilized powder.
Keep that product description beside the tested sample description. For a like-for-like comparison, match the no-DAC form, both components, and the labeled amounts—not just the word “blend.” For the current format and ordering details, use the product listing; the vial-and-quantity FAQ explains the ordering unit.
2. Read the component amounts beside the combined content
The main results panel reports 10.31mg Net Blend Peptide Content, with two component rows:
| Reported field | Reported amount |
|---|---|
| CJC-1295 | 5.05mg |
| Ipamorelin | 5.26mg |
| Net Blend Peptide Content | 10.31mg |
The displayed amounts add up: 5.05 + 5.26 = 10.31mg. That arithmetic helps you reconcile the rows. It does not turn the labeled 5mg + 5mg into the measured result, or make the two reported component amounts identical.
Record component amounts exactly as the laboratory reports them, alongside its method notes. A component row alone does not describe its calibration or calculation basis. If your procurement specification requires a particular component-assay method, match that requirement to the laboratory’s method documentation.
3. Keep all three vial results in view
The same record includes a three-vial conformity table. This adds useful sample-to-sample context beyond the main panel:
| Sample | HPLC purity | Combined net content |
|---|---|---|
| Dedicated V0 | 99.52% | 10.31mg |
| Conformity V1 | 99.23% | 10.57mg |
| Conformity V2 | 99.30% | 10.46mg |
| Issuer-reported mean | 99.35% | 10.45mg |
The 10.45mg mean is combined blend content, not the amount of each component. The component rows above belong to the main results panel, not to separate component assays reported for V1 and V2. Keeping those distinctions visible makes the comparison reproducible.
The laboratory identifies Conformity V2 as the representative chromatogram because its purity is closest to the batch mean. That explains why the displayed chromatogram and the headline V0 result refer to different samples. These three submitted vials provide observed sampling evidence, not individual measurements of every vial in the lot.
4. Match each result to its analytical question
Identidad: the record confirms CJC-1295 + Ipamorelin and describes HPLC retention-time comparison with a reference standard. That is the method to record; it is not a mass-spectrometry result.
Pureza: the methodology describes RP-HPLC area normalization at 214nm. Keep the report’s blend-purity result as written rather than assigning the same percentage independently to both components. Purity and the separate mg-content field answer different questions; multiplying the labeled amount by purity does not replace the reported content result.
Additional analyses: this record separately lists elemental-impurity screening by ICP-MS, PCR testing under its sterility heading, endotoxin testing, and fentanyl screening. For example, the main endotoxin result is ≤0.05 EU/mL; preserve that unit rather than relabeling it EU/vial. Use the original method, result and criterion together for whichever analyses your research specification requires.
5. Turn the report into a useful purchasing comparison
Abre el free COA comparison worksheet alongside the source record. For a blend, keep a separate row for each named component, a row for combined content, and one row per tested vial. Compare reports for the same composition and labeled amount, and keep individual results separate from issuer-reported means.
Panda’s product page also retains earlier Janoshik reports for prior lots. Those are useful historical records; keep their lot numbers separate from PP2605-008 when comparing results. The report finder provides another route to available documentation.
You can move directly from the source record to current CJC-1295 no DAC + Ipamorelin availability and purchasing details. For broader supplier comparisons, use the research-material evaluation guide.
Sources
- ILS Laboratories:
COA-2026--D_Y5P, lot PP2605-008; complete saved verification record, especially the main panel, conformity table, statistical summary and methodology. - Bachem: Quality Control of Amino Acids & Peptides, for the distinction between chromatographic purity and content.
Published September 18, 2026 by Panda Peptides. This supplier-authored guide explains analytical documentation for legitimate laboratory research procurement. It is not an independent vendor ranking or guidance for human or veterinary use.