Growth hormone is the one item in our set reported by fill rather than purity, and its number looks worse because it is a different number

We are an affiliate: if you order from Growth Guys using this code we earn a commission, at no extra cost to you. We are not Growth Guys and have no ownership of or role in the company.

Across the published set, growth hormone averages a figure several points below every other item we have counted.

The number is lower, and that is not a quality finding

Across the published set, growth hormone averages a figure several points below every other item we have counted. Read as a purity percentage that looks alarming. It is not one, because the assay is answering a different question: for a lyophilised protein sold by activity, the laboratory is establishing how much is in the vial against what the label claims, not what fraction of a powder is the target molecule.

Fill against label is a different test from purity

A small-molecule peptide is reported as a percentage of the sample. A protein sold in international units is reported as measured content against stated content. A vial reading slightly over or under its label is ordinary manufacturing variance; the same deviation expressed as a purity percentage would read as contamination. Comparing the two numbers directly, which is what a ranking table invites, compares different measurements.

What a sensible reader does with it

Read growth hormone results against other growth hormone results, never against a peptide purity column. Within its own series the question is whether vials cluster near label and whether any sit far enough below to matter at the dose someone would use.

Why it is worth publishing the weaker-looking number

Leaving it out would produce a cleaner table and a less honest one. A published set with no result that looks bad has either been fortunate or filtered, and from outside those are identical. The figure that needs explaining is the one that demonstrates the set is not curated.

What the assay cannot tell you

Nothing about biological activity. Content against label establishes that the stated quantity is present; it does not establish that the protein is correctly folded or active, which is a separate and considerably harder measurement that essentially nobody in this market publishes.

The published record for this item

The published set we counted contains 20 report(s) naming HGH, averaging 96.63% purity. Each resolves on the testing laboratory's own portal rather than as a file hosted by the seller.

Where to check this independently

The claims on this page about growth hormone is the one item in our set reported by fill rather than purity, and its number looks worse because it is a different number can be checked against sources outside this site:

The code discussed throughout this site is HEALTHYLIFE10 — 10% off the subtotal at growthguys.com, no minimum, nothing excluded. The dated tests are at the evidence index; the argument in full is on the full code page.

Related