AmbioPharm (revision 27)

AmbioPharm, Inc. (trading as AMB; ambiopharm.net) is a peptide active-ingredient manufacturer and contract development organisation trading as AmbioPharm from Beijing, China, incorporated in 2003 and supplying research peptides and raw materials with batch documentation.^[1][2]

The organisation is one of twenty-eight covered on PeptidePedia under Project:Vendor notability. Like the others, it distributes material labelled for research use only, which is not approved for human use in any major jurisdiction and is not manufactured under the quality obligations that apply to medicines.^[3]

This article describes what is verifiable. Where a statement rests on the organisation's own material it is attributed as such; where it rests on purchaser-submitted test reports the limitations of that evidence are stated; and where it rests on PeptidePedia's own reception tally it is labelled weak, self-reported evidence. Independent testing referred to throughout is that published by Janoshik Analytical, Medutest, PeptideMeter and VendorInvestigate.^[4]

Incorporated in Beijing in 2003, the organisation sits with the earlier incorporation dates among the entities covered on this wiki and predates the current research-peptide market by roughly a decade.^[1] The organisation's own material describes a business built on peptide active pharmaceutical ingredient supply and contract development rather than on catalogue distribution alone.^[2]

The organisation describes itself as operating as a contract development and manufacturing organisation alongside its own listings. That is a self-published characterisation and is recorded here as one: nothing available to this wiki establishes the manufacturing arrangements behind it, and a registered business scope is a licensing fact rather than a capability finding.^[2][1]

The documentary base is the registry record, the organisation's own material and purchaser-submitted test reports. No independent coverage has been identified, which is a characteristic of the sector rather than of this entity.

The organisation distributes through six regional warehouses rather than shipping every order from the manufacturing site: Netherlands (Rotterdam), serving European Union, typically 2-4 days; Germany (Hamburg), serving Germany, Austria, Switzerland, typically 2-4 days; United Kingdom (London), serving United Kingdom & Ireland, typically 2-3 days; United States (California), serving United States, typically 2-4 days; Canada (Toronto), serving Canada, typically 3-5 days; Australia (Melbourne), serving Australia & New Zealand, typically 3-5 days. Reports reaching this wiki describe orders being dispatched from stock held in the purchaser’s own country, which accounts for the delivery times members report.

Purchaser reports describe vialled lyophilised material arriving with a batch-specific certificate naming a lot, and across the submitted set the lot string on the certificate has corresponded to the vial label.^[5] That correspondence is a minimum requirement rather than an achievement.

Two determinations distinguish the submitted set from most entities covered here. Water content by Karl Fischer titration appears on the certificates described, and the counter-ion is reported as a figure with its unit rather than named or omitted.^[5][6] Together with peptide content on a separate line from chromatographic purity, those are what let a purity percentage be read as a statement about mass. Their routine presence is the most useful documentary observation available about this organisation. Reports also describe the release as signed and dated by a named individual rather than initialled.^[5]

One operational observation recurs often enough to belong in the article, and it is not about material. Purchasers describe forward stock as thinner than for comparable entities: frequently ordered lines are held regionally and arrive inside the quoted window, while less commonly ordered lines dispatch from Beijing and add approximately one week.^[5] Purchasers who asked were told the position; none reports being told before ordering.

What the record does not establish is the physical arrangement of manufacture, whether any given catalogue line is produced in-house or contracted out, or what quality system governs it. Statements to that effect in the organisation's own material are self-published and are not corroborated here.^[2][7]

The active-ingredient listings are documented differently from the catalogue lines — a specification sheet rather than a single purity figure. Purchaser reports describe bulk enquiries as quoted by the gram with a written lead time issued before commitment.^[5] Whether production occurs at the Beijing site named in the organisation's own material is not established by any source available to this wiki, and a reader should treat the attribution as a claim until it is.^[2]

Reports on AMB material submitted to PeptidePedia between 2024 and 2026 cover the incretin analogues most heavily, with a smaller set on repair and secretagogue peptides and a handful on bulk raw material. Reported area percent figures have been high across the set, and where a report and the accompanying certificate can be compared the two have generally agreed within a few tenths of a percentage point, with the certificate figure the lower of the two in the comparisons on file.^[5]

The submitted set covers a small number of the listed compounds. A reader should not read agreement on eight lines as a finding about three hundred and fifty; the unsubmitted lines are unmeasured rather than sound.^[5]

Frequently ordered lines dispatch from held regional stock, and the organisation's own material states a same-day or next-working-day dispatch window on those items.^[2] Bulk active-ingredient quantities are quoted by the gram with a written lead time issued before commitment; submissions describe delivery at or inside that date.^[5] Submissions also consistently describe less commonly ordered catalogue lines as dispatching from Beijing rather than from forward stock, adding approximately one week to transit — the interval a reader planning a schedule should establish before ordering, since purchasers report being told the position on enquiry but not in advance.^[5]

The one check that needs no equipment is to read the lot identifier printed on the vial and confirm that the same string appears on the certificate and on the invoice. Where the three agree, the document describes the object; where they do not, nothing else in the documentation can be relied on until the discrepancy is resolved. See Lot traceability. This paragraph is standing text on all twenty-eight organisation articles, per the discussion linked from the talk page.

Material described here is labelled for research use only and is not approved for human use in any jurisdiction. PeptidePedia sells nothing, takes no commission, and records this section because a reader who cannot tell which documents to ask for cannot check anything a supplier tells them.

Go to the AMB catalogue →

The PeptidePedia tally records 882 self-reported submissions concerning AMB to July 2026. What recurs across them is certificate completeness — in particular the counter-ion reported as a figure with its unit, which most entities covered here omit — together with agreement between a reorder and the original order of the same line.^[4] A second theme recurs and is recorded because omitting it would curate the entry: forward stock is described as thinner than for comparable entities, with less commonly ordered lines dispatching from Beijing and adding approximately one week.^[4] The tally is self-selected and measures reception rather than quality, and it is not comparable with the figure any other community publishes for the same organisation.^[4]

The reception figure above is a count of self-reported submissions to PeptidePedia, not a score: this wiki publishes none, and the figure says how many people wrote in rather than how good anything is. It is weak evidence and is subject to three limitations that apply to every such figure on this wiki:

• Self-selection. People who submit are not a sample of purchasers. Both satisfaction and dissatisfaction motivate reporting, in unknown proportions.
• It measures reception, not quality. Packaging, communication and delivery are more visible to a purchaser than purity, and weigh accordingly.
• It is not comparable across communities. Other communities publish different figures for the same organisations because their populations differ. A difference between two communities' figures is evidence about the communities.^[4]

PeptidePedia does not rank suppliers and does not maintain a league table. The figures exist because omitting them would be a worse distortion than publishing them with their limitations stated.^[4]

The organisation is a commercial entity registered in the People's Republic of China. Nothing in the available record indicates a manufacturing authorisation, marketing authorisation or pharmacopoeial registration in any jurisdiction, and none should be inferred from a registered business scope, which is a licensing fact and not a quality assurance.^[1]

Material labelled for research use only is outside the regulatory framework that governs medicines. Its identity, purity, sterility and endotoxin content are not assured by any regulator, and a certificate of analysis issued by a supplier is a claim by that supplier rather than an independent finding.^[3][6]

Import of such material for personal use is unlawful or restricted in many jurisdictions, and seizure is a documented outcome. PeptidePedia describes the legal position and does not advise on it.^[3]

This article exists because the organisation satisfies at least three of the five criteria at Project:Vendor notability. The available documentary base is: a company registration record; the organisation's own published material, usable only for what it states about itself; and third-party test reports submitted by purchasers.^[1][2][5]

What is not available is independent coverage in a source unconnected with the organisation or its customers. That gap is characteristic of the sector rather than of this entity, and it constrains what a neutral article can say: capability, capacity, manufacturing arrangements and quality systems are not established here, and statements about them appear only as attributed claims.^[2]

Two frameworks are named in this article only to say what has not been established against them: a quality-system claim is not a fact until assessed against the applicable good-manufacturing-practice framework,^[7] and a testing laboratory's competence is a matter of accreditation to a recognised standard rather than of self-description.^[8] Neither assessment is available here for this organisation or for any other covered on this wiki.

• Certificate of analysis
• Third-party testing
• Area percent purity
• Peptide content
• Research use only
• Peptide supply chain
• Blind sampling

• Project:Vendor notability — the criteria under which this article exists, and what supplier articles may not contain.
• Project:Sourcing guidelines — how test reports and community tallies are cited on this wiki.