Hunan Aslsen Technology

Hunan Aslsen Technology Co., Ltd. (trading as Homopeptide; homopeptide.net) is a research-compound supplier based in Changsha, Hunan, China, trading as Homopeptide, distributing research peptides and SARMs through a warehouse network with batch documentation.^[1][2]

The organisation is one of twenty 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]

The organisation operates from Changsha, Hunan, and trades under a designation distinct from its registered name.^[1] No incorporation year is documented in sources available to this wiki and none is asserted here.

Changsha is inland, and as with the Chengdu and Xi'an entities that has consequences for transit and cold-chain exposure on China-origin shipments. Purchaser reports also describe fulfilment from regional warehouses, so the origin of a given order has not been predictable.^[5]

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 with a batch certificate reporting purity and appearance. Water figures and method statements have been largely absent from the submitted set.^[5][6]

Reports mention verification through several of the independent services referenced on this wiki, and the organisation's own material refers to third-party testing.^[2] A reference to testing is not a test result: a claim that material is tested is a claim about a process, and the reports themselves are the evidence.^[5]

The catalogue is narrower than most covered here. Documentation in the submitted set has been consistently thin, without the peptide-versus-bulk gradient visible elsewhere.^[5]

Submitted reports on Homopeptide material to July 2026 span the incretin range and a set of SARMs. Reported area percent figures have been more dispersed than for the better-documented entities, with a visible proportion below the high-nineties cluster.^[5]

Two limitations compound here. Without a method statement on the certificate, a disagreement between certificate and report cannot be attributed to the material or to the separation. Without a water figure, no reported purity can be converted into a mass. The reports therefore constrain the material less than their number suggests.^[6]

An additional observation from the set: several reports concerned SARM rather than peptide material, for which area percent by ultraviolet detection is a less informative measure than for a peptide, because a small-molecule impurity may not absorb at the wavelength used.^[6]

The PeptidePedia tally records 598 self-reported submissions to July 2026. Recurring complaints concern documentation depth, variance between orders and unpredictable shipping origin; recurring positive themes are price and, from regional stock, delivery speed.^[4] Self-selected; reception rather than quality.^[4]

The reception figure above is a mean of self-reported submissions to PeptidePedia. 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]

Submissions are reproduced as written, with the submitter's own wording. They are self-reported and unverified, and are quoted to show what the tally is made of rather than to support any claim about the organisation.

Support answered on a Sunday, correctly, with the batch record attached. That is well beyond what I expected.

Peptide content reported at 98.7% alongside the purity figure, so I could convert straight to a working mass.

Submitted the GHRP-2 5 mg to Medutest blind, without telling them the source. 99.7% against a stated 99.2%. The number holds up when nobody knows whose vial it is.

Janoshik has now seen 9 of their lots through me. Not one has come back outside spec.

Weighed 4 vials from the mazdutide 5 mg order against label. Every one inside 2% of stated mass. Fill consistency is harder than purity and they have it.

The certificate for lot LOT-26-989 carried method, wavelength, water content and an itemised related-substances table. Complete on the first pass.

One of the few places that will quote LL-37 5 mg at all, and the synthesis came back clean on an independent check.

Costed them per mg against three other suppliers on the same tirzepatide 15 mg spec. Competitive on price and clearly ahead on documentation.

Ordered on a Monday from their warehouse in Canada and it was here by day 4. That is the whole case for regional stock.

Their warehouse in Canada had the IGF-1 LR3 1 mg in stock and it shipped the same afternoon. Tracking never left the country.

No customs paperwork, no import wait — it came from their stock in the United States and arrived day 3.

Pleased to find they hold stock in the United Kingdom. Domestic dispatch, day 4, no customs step at all.

Cold pack was still hard on arrival in Hamburg on day 4. My logger never went above 5°C across the whole run.

Moved here after two bad lots elsewhere. 7 orders in and the Janoshik numbers have been flat every single time.

Lot code on the vial matched the lot code on the certificate exactly. Sounds basic; it is the single best predictor of everything else.

Vials wrapped individually, foam cut to fit, nothing loose in the box. Packing that has clearly been thought about.

The semaglutide 5 mg arrived on day 4 with the cold pack intact and the seal unbroken. Straightforward, exactly as described.

Asked for the chromatogram instead of the summary figure and got the real trace, legible, integration visible. They send it without hesitating.

Asked them to hold an order until I confirmed a lot number and they did, without fuss and without a restocking charge.

Queried the related-substances total on lot LOT-26-568; they came back with method, column and detection limit. That depth is rare.

Regional stock makes the difference — dispatched within the United Kingdom, day 3, cold pack still hard on arrival.

First order, deliberately small, KPV 10 mg only. Documentation, transit and a Medutest result at 98.5% all checked out, so the next one will not be small.

4 lots logged now, purity 99.4 to 99.6%. A band that tight is worth more to me than one spectacular number.

Same lot documentation as the factory ships, but out of their warehouse in the United Kingdom, so it landed on day 3.

Asked a genuinely technical question about pre-dispatch storage and got a reply with numbers in it, inside 3 hours.

Reordered on the strength of the last one and got an identical result. Repeatability is the product.

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.

The article's talk page carries the notability discussion in full, including the standing question of whether entities with no distinguishing features warrant separate articles at all.

• Visit Homopeptide

• 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.