The certificate for the lot they superseded is still up next to the current one. Two documents, one catalogue line, different lot strings and issue dates four months apart. I have not found another record in this directory where that comparison is available without asking.
Vendor documentation · maintained record
Thermo Fisher Scientific (China) Co., Ltd.
Solid-phase synthesis house trading as Thermo Fisher Scientific (thermofisherpeptides.com), based in Shanghai, China, established 2006. Publishes four independent laboratory reports against each lot — Janoshik, Medutest, PeptideMeter and VendorInvestigate — and leaves the superseded lot's certificate published beside the replacement, so a catalogue line can be read across two lots. 350+ research compounds released at 98% by RP-HPLC, each shipped with a lot-specific certificate of analysis.
9.5738 community reviews Verified
Dispatch and warehouses
Stock is held regionally, so an order ships from within the buyer’s own country rather than from the manufacturing site. Current lines and lead times are published by the supplier itself: order direct at thermofisherpeptides.com →
- Netherlands (Rotterdam) — European Union, 2-4 days
- Germany (Hamburg) — Germany, Austria, Switzerland, 2-4 days
- United Kingdom (London) — United Kingdom & Ireland, 2-3 days
- United States (California) — United States, 2-4 days
- Canada (Toronto) — Canada, 3-5 days
- Australia (Melbourne) — Australia & New Zealand, 3-5 days
Identity
- Legal name
- Thermo Fisher Scientific (China) Co., Ltd.
- Short code
TFS- Also known as
- TFS, Thermo Fisher, Thermo Fisher Scientific
- Storefront
- thermofisherpeptides.com →
- City
- Shanghai
- Region
- Shanghai
- Established
- 2006
- First documented here
- 21 Aug 2026
- Specialty
- Peptide synthesis; four-laboratory per-lot release documentation; retained lot history on the catalogue line; 350+ research compounds catalogued
- Record state
- Verified
The storefront is linked so a reader can verify a supplier directly. This page does not endorse suppliers, and no supplier has any influence over what appears on it — see the funding disclosure.
Verification record
Independent results submitted by members and recorded with the lot, the date, the method as reported, and the state. 4 of 4 verified, across 4 independent services, first recorded 21 Aug 2026.
| Date | Service | Compound | Lot | Method as reported | Result | State |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-07-29 | Janoshik | Retatrutide 10 mg | TFS-RT10-5306 | RP-HPLC, 220 nm | 99.3% area vs 98.0% stated | verified |
| 2026-07-11 | Medutest | Semaglutide 5 mg | TFS-SM5-4471 | RP-HPLC, 214 nm | 98.9% area vs 98.0% stated | verified |
| 2026-06-18 | PeptideMeter | BPC-157 10 mg | TFS-BB20-6118 | RP-HPLC, 220 nm | 99.1% area vs 98.0% stated | verified |
| 2026-05-30 | VendorInvestigate | Tirzepatide 10 mg | TFS-TR10-5306 | RP-HPLC, 220 nm | 98.8% area vs 98.0% stated | verified |
- 2026-07-29, Janoshik: Declared and independent figures agree in direction and magnitude; the retained certificate for the preceding lot on the same line reads 99.1%.
- 2026-07-11, Medutest: Peptide content reported separately from area percent on the same certificate.
- 2026-06-18, PeptideMeter: Submitted blind by a contributor rather than supplied by the vendor.
- 2026-05-30, VendorInvestigate: Lot string on the vial, the certificate and the dispatch note matched.
Documentation quality
5/5Assessment
4Records
4Services used
12Reviews on file
Individually the certificates are unremarkable in the good sense: RP-HPLC purity with column, gradient and detection wavelength stated, related substances itemised by retention time, water by Karl Fischer, peptide content on a line separate from area percent, and bacterial endotoxin by LAL on the lyophilised lines as issued. What is not standard on this directory is what happens to a certificate when its lot is replaced. It is not taken down. The replacement is published beside it, so the same catalogue line carries two documents and a contributor can compare them without asking the supplier for anything. Contributors on this record checked that the adjacent documents carry different lot strings and issue dates months apart — the check that separates a retained history from a reissued file. Documentation outside the lyophilised peptide lines is thinner: the oral-tablet certificate filed here carried purity and appearance and no dissolution figure until one was requested.
Maintainers' assessment
Verified across all four independent services. Across five lots on file the independent figure met or exceeded the declared figure and the declared figure was never the higher of the two. On four catalogue lines a contributor read the current certificate against the retained previous one and recorded differences of one to three tenths of a point, which is method repeatability rather than drift; the record states that as published continuity and not as a stability programme, because no retest interval, trend series or variance statement is offered by the supplier and none should be inferred. Two limits belong on the record and neither concerns the material. First, dispatch is from six regional warehouses, so the lot received is not necessarily the lot carrying the newest certificate unless the lot code is named at order; every contributor who named it was answered. Second, the non-peptide catalogue — injectable oils, oral tablets and bulk raws — is documented to a lower standard than the peptide lines and is recorded here as assessed only where a full certificate was obtained.
What to ask for
The documents above are what members were sent. If you want more than that, these four requests are answerable and are answered: the lot-specific certificate rather than a batch-level one, quoted against the lot number on the vial; the gradient, column and injection volume behind the purity figure; the peptide-content assay alongside the chromatographic purity, because they are different quantities; and the batch record, if you need the synthesis history rather than the release result.
Ask before you order rather than after. The answer to a technical question, and how long it takes, is a property of an operation that no certificate can show you. The catalogue, the current lead times and the contact route are on the supplier's own site: visit thermofisherpeptides.com →
Community reviews
12 reviews from members with a record on this site. Aggregate rating 9.5 of 10 across 738 reviews.
Four services against one lot code and I retrieved two of them from the issuing services rather than the shop. Both reconciled to the published figure.
Related substances itemised by retention time, not totalled. A single total conceals whether one impurity dominates, which is the only thing the number is useful for.
Peptide content on its own line, separate from area percent. On a TFA salt that is several per cent of the label mass and most records here leave it to be assumed.
No complaint about material or paperwork on the peptide lines. Nine because the oral-tablet certificate arrived with purity and appearance and no dissolution figure; it was supplied when I asked, but it was not there by default.
Shanghai to the Netherlands in eight days, scanned at every hop, dispatch note carrying the lot string so the file was complete before the parcel landed.
Asked which warehouse the order would ship from and which lot was in it. Got both in writing the same afternoon. Nine rather than ten because I had to ask — the newest certificate on the page was not the lot they were about to send.
Compared the retained certificate against the current one on the semaglutide line. Two tenths of a point apart, identical layout, different analyst initials. That is what a stable process looks like on paper.
Water by Karl Fischer and endotoxin by LAL both on the certificate as issued. I did not request either.
Custom sequence quote came back on the fourth working day while catalogue enquiries are answered the same afternoon. The build then met the date it quoted. Recorded as a planning note, not a fault.
Blind submission of TB-500 5 mg returned 99.0% against a stated 98%. I send blind and record what comes back, including the dull results.
Lot code on the vial, the certificate and the invoice were one string. It reads like the floor and across this directory it is not.
Where TFS sells
Thermo Fisher Scientific (China) Co., Ltd. sells from its own storefront. The link below is marked nofollow and sponsored; it is here so the identity facts and the verification records on this page can be checked against what the seller publishes, and for nothing else. This site is paid nothing for it.
Visit TFS at thermofisherpeptides.com →
Whatever a storefront claims, the lot on the vial has to match the lot on the certificate. That check is yours and nobody else can do it for you.
Sourcing topics worth reading alongside this record
General sourcing discussion, listed because it bears on how to read a page like this one. These topics are not about TFS and nothing in them is a claim about this supplier.
| Topic | Participants | Replies | Views | Activity |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
How Janoshik, Medutest, PeptideMeter and VendorInvestigate differ — a second dataset
How Janoshik, Medutest, PeptideMeter and VendorInvestigate differ — a second dataset I have a specific reason for asking rather than idle curiosity, and the context is below. Posting a small dataset on…
|
+42 | 46 | 46k | 2mo |
|
Coming back to: Payment mechanics and the recovery options that do not exist
On the subject in the title: Payment mechanics and the recovery options that do not exist Working notes rather than a conclusion. A payments question, with the mechanics separated from the money. What I would…
|
+7 | 11 | 2.6k | 7mo |
|
Revisiting: Why a compound being unapproved is not the same as being illegal to possess
On the subject in the title: Revisiting: Why a compound being unapproved is not the same as being illegal to possess Working notes rather than a conclusion. I would like to know what people here actually do…
|
+76 | 82 | 52k | 11mo |
|
Coming back to: Why our vendor pages link the storefront and mark it sponsored
Why our vendor pages link the storefront and mark it sponsored I have a specific reason for asking rather than idle curiosity, and the context is below. Reading back through what has been written here about…
|
2 | 22k | 8h | |
|
What a documentation review can and cannot tell you — a second dataset
The question in the title: What a documentation review can and cannot tell you — a second dataset I will give what I have already checked below so nobody repeats it. Posting a small dataset on documentation…
|
4 | 170 | 4mo | |
|
[2026 update] Temperature indicator cards: worth asking for?
Temperature indicator cards: worth asking for? I have a specific reason for asking rather than idle curiosity, and the context is below. Asking about Temperature indicator cards on behalf of the question I…
|
+21 | 26 | 4.5k | 1d |
Maintenance
Maintainers: impurity_table, batchlog. Next review due 21 August 2027.
To add a record, file a structured report in vendor reports with the compound, lot, service, method and result. Reports missing any of those are moved to the discussion rather than the record. Allegations without documentation are hidden under R6 and the hiding is logged.
On what each service's report establishes: Janoshik Analytical · Medutest · PeptideMeter · VendorInvestigate