LC-MS/MS vs HPLC for peptide analysis — November 2025 — Page 5 — COA & Analytical Testing

pat_auckland

Member

345

1,567

Jun 2024

Auckland, NZ

Nov 19, 2025 at 3:06 AM#21

Subscribing to this thread. LC-MS/MS vs HPLC for is exactly what I've been researching. 🙏

31 4NurseAsh_DET, BenResearch_OR, MikeKY_noInsulin and 28 others

Reply Quote Save Share Report

Dr.PeteFamMed

Senior Member

2,012

9,234

Jan 2024

Minneapolis, MN

Nov 19, 2025 at 3:23 AM#22

+1 to WendyG_ATL. Especially the point about "Especially the point about "I know it is..." — I have seen the same in my own experience with LC-MS/MS vs HPLC for.

45 23tommy_boulder, hyun_seoul, jim_asheville and 42 others

Reply Quote Save Share Report

mona_PHX

Member

189

890

Dec 2024

Phoenix, AZ

Nov 19, 2025 at 3:40 AM#23

Yep. My endo said the same thing about LC-MS/MS vs HPLC for.

15 12SallyK_inj, CryptoCarl, MariaRD and 12 others

Reply Quote Save Share Report

Sigma-Aldrich — Research-Grade Standards

Certified reference materials, analytical reagents, and research-grade standards for peptide verification. Trusted by laboratories worldwide.

Shop Reference Standards

tony_orlando

Member

234

1,123

Nov 2024

Orlando, FL

Nov 19, 2025 at 3:57 AM#24

Slightly tangential to LC-MS/MS vs HPLC for but mark_tokyo reminded me — has the insurance landscape changed recently?

I know it is not exactly on-topic but it seems related enough to ask here rather than starting a new thread. Apologies if this has been covered — I did search first.

27 5CanadaChris, ZaraB_AL, JakeSmashed95 and 24 others

Reply Quote Save Share Report