Shanghai Sigma-Audley New Material Technology (revision 79)

Shanghai Sigma-Audley New Material Technology Co., Ltd. (trading as SSA; shanghaisigmaaudley.com) is a research-compound supplier trading as SSA from Shanghai, China, incorporated in 2018 under a registered name in the new-materials sector, and distributing research peptides and related materials 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 registered legal name describes the organisation as a new-material technology company rather than a pharmaceutical or biochemical one.^[1] That is a common pattern among entities in this sector and is not in itself remarkable, but it is worth stating in an encyclopedia article because the registered business scope is the only formal statement of what an organisation is licensed to do, and it does not always match what it sells.

The trading name contains "Sigma", which is also the name of a large and entirely separate international reference-standards supplier. As with several organisations covered here, no source available to this wiki establishes any relationship between them, and the shared word should not be read as implying one.^[2]

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.

Reports reaching this wiki describe vialled lyophilised material with a batch-specific certificate, packaged with a cold pack for the incretin analogues.^[5] Packaging descriptions have been consistent enough across submissions to suggest a settled fulfilment process, which is a modest but real observation about an organisation of this type.

The organisation's own material describes a product range and documentation practice; it makes no certification claim that this wiki has been able to corroborate, and any such claim would in any case require assessment against the applicable framework rather than acceptance at face value.^[6][2]

Documentation detail reported by purchasers is markedly better for the incretin analogues than for the bulk categories, a gradient visible across most organisations covered on this wiki and probably reflecting where purchaser scrutiny is concentrated.^[5]

Submitted reports on SSA material to July 2026 are concentrated on tirzepatide and semaglutide, with a smaller set on repair peptides. Reported area percent figures have clustered in the high nineties, and where a certificate accompanied the sample the two figures have generally been close.^[5]

The same limitation applies as everywhere in this sector: these are purchaser-submitted reports on purchaser-selected samples. They cannot be read as a sample of output, and the reported clustering may reflect which samples purchasers chose to have tested as much as anything about the material.^[5] None of the submitted certificates in this set reported a water content, so none of the purity figures can be converted into a mass.^[7]

The PeptidePedia tally records 889 self-reported submissions to July 2026. Recurring positive themes are packaging and delivery consistency; recurring negative themes are documentation depth outside the incretin range and the naming ambiguity described above.^[4] The tally is self-selected and measures 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]

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][7]

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,^[6] 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 SSA

• 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.