What machines did you use?
There are lots of
methods around, already proven for repeatability.
Who doesn't test raws?
Simec? Analyzer?
Who tested that GH? Simec? Analyzer? Other?
Would you mind posting links?
GC-MassSpec is relatively simple because as long as your
method (column/solvent/flow-rate/injection-volume) is good enough so that no two substances arrive at the MS detector at the same time, the peaks can often be identified by library-match alone, without needing reference standards, although they help a lot for
validation (which ain't really required in UG testing).
As for quantification
lots of proven HPLC methods all around
You won't believe how many Quality Control chromatographers, some even
pharma QC
use the same calibration curve for several
dozens tests (all with the same method), often taking several days nonstop leaving the machine working at night with the autosampler.
They tell you: nah, as long as you don't replace the column the peaks won't vary much.
I have read about UG testers who don't own any GC machines whatsoever
instead relying on HPLC retention-times for "substance identification".
While far from ideal but this can work OK if they use long testing times so the peaks show quite far away from each other, and have some kind of reference-standards.
I have read about them using real pharma-grade raws as makeshift reference-standards. This still works fine for UG testing, where a large error margin doesn't matter much.
After all a perfectly fine HPLC machine can be purchased for under $40k.
So charging $80 (about $50 net, after subtracting column and solvent costs), with 100+ customers per month means a paid in full HPLC machine in less than 6 months. This makes sense.
But
@Analyzer claims to own GC-MS, GC-FID, and
several HPLCs (as evidenced by
@mercury in Agilent auto-numbering comment, at the beginning of this thread)
That's a $700k to 1Mil investment (plus columns, solvents recurring costs) to charge just 40 bucks for testing (and risk going to jail for doing so)?
That doesn't make any sense
let's hope he ain't no:
A. Photoshop artist (probably with access to real pharma QC data)
B. He really has access to all those machines, but is really a GIP looking for TNEF (if you're lucky), or a GIP looking for an easy TSUB to get a raise.
I'm not pointing fingers YET
but his low Return On Investment looks really suspicious.
I don't think his 40 bucks even cover for Helium, solvents, columns, filters costs. Let alone recovering his 6-7 figures investment. Simple math.