The magnesium document.
Three of four.

Four questions a certificate can answer, counted. The state is a count of rows on a document — whether a result column exists for that axis, with a method printed beside it. The margin is the division or subtraction of two figures printed on the same row, and on this mark there is one: 10.94 above the floor on the magnesium row, which is 102.54 − 91.6 in the document’s own units. Everything else above is transcription or an honest blank; the table the arithmetic refers to is on /testing, where the figures live. The token is a count of counts, and the denominator is always printed so it reads as an incompletion rather than an award. Nobody awards this and there is no body that could take it away. What each of those words means, at length.

Where every line
on this page came from.

One row per field: what it says, where it came from, and how a stranger checks it without taking our word for any of it. This page carries one absence — identity was never run — and it is named, with the reason it is empty printed beside it rather than left to be inferred. Since 15 October 2026 it also carries the first measured magnesium figure we have held for this product, in the laboratory’s serving rather than the label’s; the document is on this page and you can count the rows yourself.

Lot code

MGL260212, printed on the document as Batch/Lot and legible on the sample photograph beside it, where the bag reads MGL260212 – 01 – 0001, 505 Kilogram, and is hand-marked “Lab.” It is the raw-material powder lot, not a TARE fill lot — a bag Vox Nutrition had tested before anything was encapsulated. The document the catalog carried from 2 to 15 September 2026 photographed a different sublot of the same lot, – 05 – 0001, hand-marked “Re-work 1 / Re-work 2”; this is a different sample, not a re-test of that powder. The bag’s part-number line reads 13072 – Blend, and 13072 is the number the certificate’s Sample Name carries; the document does not say what “Blend” denotes, and we do not guess. We are not deriving a code from the label or from the manufacturer’s catalogue, and we are not printing this one anywhere it could be mistaken for the number on your bottle. The retired code that used to sit on this site belonged to a different bottle from a different manufacturer, and that page now says so.Source — the certificate header, field “Batch/Lot”, and the bag label in the sample photographCheck it — The header of the document above, top left, third line; the bag is beside the summary table.

Formula and servings

Night Work — magnesium glycinate. Three capsules supplying 275 mg of elemental magnesium from 2,500 mg of magnesium glycinate, 30 servings to the bottle, 90 capsules. Every one of those is a label figure, named as one here, and this certificate does not test any of them: its magnesium figure is in the laboratory’s 926 mg serving, which the document does not relate to a capsule, and the arithmetic that would connect the two is printed on /testing as arithmetic. The full panel is on The Monograph.Source — the label, confirmed in writing by our manufacturer on 27 August 2026Check it — Read the bottle. Then read the certificate above and note that its magnesium row is per 926 mg serving, and that no row on it names a capsule.

Dates and extent

Three analyses over three days. Received 2026-02-19, completed 2026-02-24; the summary rows are dated 2026-02-22 (heavy metals), 2026-02-23 (microbiology) and 2026-02-24 (magnesium), and the document is signed 2026-02-24. Manufactured: Not printed on the document — the certificate’s own fields carry no manufacture date, and the bag label in the photograph carries lines that are not legible at the size this page shows them, so nothing is transcribed from them.Source — the certificate header and the three Summary of Results rowsCheck it — The document above, and the transcription row for row.

The four axis states

Potency, heavy metals and microbiology measured; identity not run — no identity section exists, and the magnesium row is an elemental assay that cannot stand in for one. That is 3 / 4, and it is 3 / 4 with every character on the document read.Source — counting rows on the certificateCheck it — The document is on this page. If a row we call measured has no result beside it, the mark is wrong and we want to be told.

Every figure, with its specification

One magnesium result against its specification, four heavy-metal results against their printed limits, and seven microbiological results each against its own limit — transcribed in the mark above and row by row at the transcription. The magnesium figure is in the document’s 926 mg serving and is never run forward to the label’s three capsules as a measured figure.Source — transcription from the certificateCheck it — /testing#night-work, row for row.

Margin

10.94 above the floor, on the magnesium row: 102.54 − 91.6, in the document’s own units, written as a subtraction because a floor reports as one. No margin on the heavy-metal rows — results in ppm, limits in mcg per day, and no conversion on the document — and none on microbiology, where every result is a less-than bound rather than a quantity and dividing one ceiling by another would produce a number that looks like a measurement and is not one.Source — ours: one subtraction, both operands printed on the certificateCheck it — Redo it: 102.54 minus 91.6.

Method

ICP-MS for magnesium and for the heavy metals, with the metals section headed USP <233>; Petrifilm/qPCR for microbiology, with that section headed USP <2021>, USP <2022>. Those are named techniques and numbered compendial chapters. Identity carries no method because it carries no test.Source — the certificate, Summary of Results and the two analysis headingsCheck it — A numbered public method can be looked up by anyone. USP <233>, <2021> and <2022> are.

Laboratory

Ethos Analytics Laboratory, 3020 E Camelback Rd STE 397, Phoenix AZ 85016 — the same independent laboratory that ran the creatine. Signed Noel Samsum, Laboratory Director, 24 February 2026. The licence and accreditation numbers in this document’s footer have been read off it directly, not copied across from the creatine certificate, and they turn out to be the same pair: Lic # 000026LRCND60176649, ISO/IEC 17025 Acc # 117798. We checked rather than assumed, and we are saying which we did.Source — the certificate footer, read at full resolutionCheck it — The footer of the document above, bottom left, beneath the Ethos mark.

Customer of record

Vox Nutrition — the header field “Customer:” names them and the footer reads “Ethos Analytics Tested for Vox Nutrition”. Not TARE, and not Rocktomic. The Vox Nutrition quality sign-off line on the document is blank. This is the same shape as the creatine certificate: the party who paid for the test is the ingredient supplier, which is normal in this trade and is exactly why the mark cannot be read as a test of our bottle.Source — the certificate header field “Customer:” and the footer attribution lineCheck it — Top left and bottom centre of the document above.

GMP assessor, standard, expiry, scope

Not known — open with our manufacturer. Until August 2026 this site carried facility attestation letters belonging to our former manufacturer. On the day we changed manufacturer they stopped describing anything we sell, so all four fields came off — assessor, standard, expiry and scope travel together or none of them do. No badge returns until the letter is in hand and someone has read it.Source — nothing; we hold no letter for the current facilityCheck it — Not checkable by anyone, including us. It is on the open list at /testing and it stays there until a document arrives.

Detection and quantitation limits

Printed beside results. Magnesium: limit of quantitation 0.1 ppm. Heavy metals: limit of quantitation 0.010 ppm and limit of detection 0.005 ppm on all four analytes, and cadmium and mercury read below the limit of quantitation — a censored result, which is the method’s floor rather than zero. The microbiological method’s own quantitation floor is not printed; the results are given as less-than 20 CFU/g, which is that floor stated as a result.Source — the certificate, the LOQ column of the Label Claim Profile and the LOQ and LOD columns of the heavy-metal tableCheck it — The document above: the fourth column of the first-page table and the third and fourth columns of the second page’s upper table.

What is missing on this lot

Identity, and the whole of the finished product. No identity section exists, and the magnesium row cannot stand in for one. Everything else on the document is measured and transcribed. Nothing on this page is blank because we have not finished reading. The certificate has been read end to end at full resolution and it is printed above so you can do the same.Source — the absence of an identity section, read off the document itselfCheck it — Count the result-bearing rows on the document above. There are twelve — one magnesium, four heavy-metal, seven microbiological — and none of them is an identity test.

Whether this is your lot

It is not. MGL260212 is a lot of raw magnesium glycinate powder that the ingredient supplier had tested before anything was encapsulated — the photograph on the certificate is the bag. Your bottle has its own code and no document we hold names it. TARE is fulfilled by a contract manufacturer and never takes possession of inventory. We do not offer per-lot traceability and we do not claim it. The day that sentence stops being true it is deleted, and not one day sooner.Source — limit 1 at /testing, and the sample photograph on the certificateCheck it — The lookup on the directory page is switched off for exactly this reason, and the note beside it says what would switch it on.

What this page
cannot tell you.

Publishing a document is undone by overstating it. Four things this page does not do, written out rather than left for you to notice.

1. The underlying file is now published, and that changed on 5 September 2026. Certificates in this trade routinely carry a clause requiring the issuer’s written approval before reproduction. We asked. Our manufacturer granted publication in writing on 17 August 2026 — he advised against it, and then said yes — so the document is on this page, whole and unaltered, which is what its own footer requires. The sentence that used to sit here, saying we had not confirmed we may reproduce it, was true when it was written and stopped being true three weeks later. Where that stands across all three documents.
2. One of our three certificates was run by the company that makes the powder. Not this one: this document was run by an outside laboratory that had nothing to do with making the capsules — but it was commissioned by, and issued to, the ingredient supplier, and the thing it tested was a bag of powder rather than a bottle of capsules. The collagen’s was run in-house, it is our hero product, and its panel says so at the top in the same size type. A mark counts what a document measured; it does not weigh who measured it, so the column beside the mark does.
3. This is the lot on the document. It is not the lot in your jar. TARE is fulfilled by a contract manufacturer and never takes possession of inventory, so we cannot connect the lot on a published document to the bottle in your hands. We do not offer per-lot traceability and we do not claim it.
4. A certificate verifies contents. It does not verify effects. Nothing on this page is a claim about what any of this does for anyone.