What a Shilajit COA Actually Tells You
Quick Summary
A Certificate of Analysis (COA) is a record of what was tested and what the laboratory measured. It is not automatically a certificate that a product is “safe” or “unsafe.”
Start with the sample or batch identity, laboratory, analytical method, units, quantitative result and specification.
ICP-MS is a widely used technique for measuring trace elements. The FDA’s Elemental Analysis Manual includes ICP-MS methods for arsenic, cadmium, lead, mercury and other elements in food-related matrices.
A simple PASS or FAIL label is meaningful only when you know which specification was applied and whether it is appropriate for the product being tested.
Serving size matters. A concentration in ppm or µg/g can be converted into an amount per daily serving before it is compared with a dose-based standard.
Total arsenic and inorganic arsenic are not the same measurement. When interpretation depends on arsenic species, a speciation method may be needed.
Shilajit is a naturally occurring geological material, so laboratory testing is one of the most useful tools consumers have for evaluating what is actually present in a finished product.
But a laboratory report can also be easy to misread.
A bold PASS stamp may look reassuring. A FAIL stamp may look alarming. A result reported in ppm may seem high or low without context. And a company may say “third-party tested” without explaining what was tested, by which method, or for which batch.
The goal of this guide is to show you how to read a Shilajit COA more intelligently, using the same questions we ask when reviewing our own Shilajit laboratory testing.
What Is a Certificate of Analysis?
A Certificate of Analysis, commonly called a COA, summarizes laboratory testing performed on a particular sample.
Depending on the scope, a Shilajit COA may include testing for:
lead;
arsenic;
cadmium;
mercury;
thallium;
aluminum;
other elemental minerals;
microbiological parameters;
composition markers such as fulvic material; or
other product-specific tests.
A COA is most informative when the report allows the reader to connect the result to a real sample, a real method and a real batch.
1. Start With Sample Identity and Batch Traceability
Before looking at any heavy-metal number, confirm what was actually tested.
A useful report should identify the sample with information such as:
product or sample name;
batch or lot number;
sample or laboratory ID;
date received or tested;
report issue date; and
the laboratory that performed the analysis.
This matters because a perfect-looking report from an unrelated product or an old batch tells you much less about the jar being sold today.
For consumers evaluating authenticity as well as testing, see our guide on how to tell if Shilajit is real.
2. Look at Who Performed the Test
Independent third-party testing can add confidence because the laboratory is separate from the brand selling the product.
Laboratory accreditation can also be useful, but it should be interpreted carefully. An accreditation such as ISO/IEC 17025 is meaningful only within the laboratory’s accredited scope. The presence of a laboratory logo or accreditation badge does not eliminate the need to examine the actual test method and result.
In-house testing can still be useful for manufacturing quality control, but when a company makes public purity or contaminant claims, independent quantitative testing gives consumers an additional layer of verification.
3. Check the Analytical Method
For elemental testing, one method you will frequently encounter is ICP-MS, short for Inductively Coupled Plasma Mass Spectrometry.
ICP-MS is designed to measure elements at very low concentrations. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s Elemental Analysis Manual includes Method 4.7 for the ICP-MS determination of arsenic, cadmium, lead, mercury and other elements in food-related matrices.
The presence of the letters “ICP-MS” does not by itself make every result comparable. Sample preparation, digestion, calibration, detection capability and laboratory quality controls still matter.
But seeing the analytical method on the report is much more informative than seeing only a generic statement such as “heavy metals tested.”
4. Understand the Units: ppm, µg/g and mg/kg
Heavy-metal results are commonly reported in units such as:
ppm, parts per million;
µg/g, micrograms per gram; or
mg/kg, milligrams per kilogram.
For a mass-to-mass concentration:
1 ppm = 1 µg/g = 1 mg/kg
So a result of 0.10 ppm is the same concentration as 0.10 µg/g.
This is useful because laboratory reports and regulatory references do not always use the same units.
5. Convert Concentration Into the Amount Per Serving
A concentration result tells you how much of an element exists in each gram of material. It does not automatically tell you the amount consumed per day.
To estimate the amount in a serving:
Element per serving (µg) = concentration (µg/g) × serving size (g)
For example, if a laboratory reported an element at 0.20 µg/g and the daily serving were 0.5 g:
0.20 µg/g × 0.5 g = 0.10 µg per serving
This is why serving size can matter when interpreting dose-based standards.
USP General Chapter <2232> Elemental Contaminants in Dietary Supplements addresses elemental contaminants in finished dietary supplement dosage forms labeled as conforming to USP or NF standards. USP’s elemental-impurity procedures also describe target concentration in relation to daily serving size when applying a daily-serving exposure framework.
That does not mean every dietary supplement on the market is automatically being judged against USP <2232>. It means that when a standard is being applied, the standard and its assumptions need to be identified clearly.
6. Know the Difference Between LOD and LOQ
Laboratory reports may use terms such as LOD and LOQ.
LOD: Limit of Detection
The LOD is the lowest level at which the laboratory can reliably detect that an analyte is present.
LOQ: Limit of Quantitation
The LOQ is the lowest level at which the laboratory can reliably quantify the analyte with the required level of performance.
If a report says <LOQ, that does not necessarily mean absolute zero. It means the concentration was below the laboratory’s validated quantitation threshold for that test.
This is why we prefer language such as “below LOQ” rather than saying a naturally occurring element is “zero.”
7. A PASS or FAIL Is Meaningless Without the Right Specification
This is one of the most important lessons when reading any COA.
The laboratory measurement and the specification used to judge that measurement are two separate things.
A laboratory may accurately determine that a sample contains a certain concentration of arsenic or lead. The same result could then be labeled PASS, FAIL or “for information only” depending on which specification is entered into the report.
Before relying on a PASS or FAIL designation, ask:
What specification was used?
Who supplied that specification?
Was it intended for an oral dietary supplement or botanical product?
Does it apply to a finished product or to a raw ingredient?
Was the intended daily serving size considered?
Is the standard based on concentration, daily exposure, or another criterion?
A PASS stamp without those answers may provide less information than the underlying quantitative result.
Likewise, a FAIL designation can be misleading if an inappropriate specification was applied to the sample.
This is why we prefer to start with the actual laboratory measurement and then interpret it against a clearly identified, relevant framework.
8. Total Arsenic Is Not the Same as Inorganic Arsenic
Arsenic is a particularly good example of why a single number may not tell the whole story.
A standard ICP-MS elemental analysis can report total arsenic. That measurement does not by itself distinguish the chemical species of arsenic present.
FDA analytical resources distinguish between total-element methods and arsenic-speciation methods. The FDA lists ICP-MS Method 4.7 for total elemental analysis and separate HPLC-ICP-MS methods for measuring arsenic species such as inorganic arsenic in certain foods.
USP materials similarly recognize that arsenic can exist in different forms and that speciation may be relevant when a total-arsenic result exceeds an applicable limit.
That does not mean total arsenic should be ignored. It means consumers should understand what the laboratory actually measured before drawing conclusions from the number.
We will cover this subject separately in our forthcoming guide to total vs. inorganic arsenic in Shilajit.
9. Look Beyond the Standard Four Heavy Metals
The most familiar elemental panel includes lead, arsenic, cadmium and mercury.
Those remain important.
But broader testing can provide additional information about a geological material such as Shilajit. In 2026, we expanded our own testing to include thallium and aluminum in addition to the standard four-element panel.
You can see the measured results and our interpretation in Thallium and Aluminum in Shilajit: What Our 2026 Lab Testing Found.
Our current testing information is also summarized on our Shilajit Lab Reports page.
10. Common Warning Signs on a Shilajit COA
No single formatting issue proves that a product is poor quality. But these are reasonable reasons to look more closely.
Only “PASS” With No Quantitative Value
A pass/fail designation tells you much less than an actual concentration when the underlying number is available.
No Test Method
If the report does not tell you how an element was measured, meaningful comparisons become more difficult.
No Batch or Sample Identifier
A report should be traceable to a particular sample or batch.
An Unclear Specification
If a report says PASS or FAIL, look for the limit or specification that produced that judgment.
An Old Report Used for a Current Product
Historical testing may provide useful background, but recent batch-relevant information is more useful when evaluating a product currently being sold.
No Identifiable Laboratory
A legitimate public report should allow the reader to understand who performed the analysis and, where appropriate, verify the laboratory’s credentials or scope.
11. What We Look for in Our Own Shilajit Testing
At Sulaiman Aftabi, we believe laboratory testing should provide information that a consumer can actually interpret.
Our testing approach focuses on:
quantitative elemental results rather than marketing badges;
finished Shilajit resin;
batch or sample traceability;
independent U.S. laboratory testing;
recognized analytical methods such as ICP-MS where appropriate;
the standard heavy-metal panel of lead, arsenic, cadmium and mercury;
expanded elemental testing such as thallium and aluminum; and
clear distinction between a laboratory measurement and the standard used to interpret that measurement.
Testing is one part of a larger authenticity picture. Origin, purification, processing and ingredient transparency matter too.
Our resin is sourced from Gilgit-Baltistan and prepared through traditional water extraction, repeated filtration and slow sun-drying. You can read more about that process in Sun-Dried vs. High-Heat Shilajit.
For a broader buying framework, see our guide to choosing the best Shilajit resin.
And if you are comparing claims around fulvic acid, read Shilajit vs. Fulvic Acid: What’s the Difference, and Does Higher Fulvic Acid Mean Better Shilajit?.
12. A Simple COA Checklist
Before accepting a Shilajit laboratory report at face value, ask seven questions:
What exact product or batch was tested?
Who performed the analysis?
What analytical method was used?
What are the actual quantitative results?
What do the units mean?
If PASS or FAIL is shown, what specification created that result?
Does the interpretation consider the product’s intended serving size and the correct type of standard?
If those questions can be answered clearly, the COA becomes much more useful.
Frequently Asked Questions
What does COA mean for Shilajit?
COA stands for Certificate of Analysis. It is a laboratory document summarizing tests performed on a sample and the resulting measurements. A COA is most useful when it identifies the batch or sample, analytical method, units and quantitative results.
What heavy metals should Shilajit be tested for?
Lead, arsenic, cadmium and mercury are commonly included in elemental contaminant panels. Broader testing may also include elements such as thallium and aluminum depending on the product and testing strategy.
What is ICP-MS?
ICP-MS stands for Inductively Coupled Plasma Mass Spectrometry. It is a sensitive analytical technique widely used to quantify trace elements. FDA’s Elemental Analysis Manual includes ICP-MS procedures for arsenic, cadmium, lead, mercury and other elements in food-related matrices.
What does ppm mean on a lab report?
ppm means parts per million. For mass-to-mass results, 1 ppm is equivalent to 1 µg/g or 1 mg/kg.
What does <LOQ mean?
<LOQ means the result was below the laboratory’s limit of quantitation. The analyte may be absent or may be present at a level below the laboratory’s validated ability to quantify it reliably. It should not automatically be interpreted as absolute zero.
Does PASS mean a Shilajit product is safe?
Not by itself. A PASS designation only tells you that the measured result met the specification applied by the laboratory. You still need to know what that specification was, whether it was appropriate for the product, and how the result relates to the intended serving size.
Does FAIL mean the laboratory measurement is wrong?
No. A quantitative measurement can be analytically correct while the pass/fail interpretation depends on an inappropriate or irrelevant specification. The measurement and the specification should therefore be evaluated separately.
Is total arsenic the same as inorganic arsenic?
No. Total arsenic measures the overall amount of arsenic in the sample. Arsenic speciation uses additional analytical separation to distinguish different arsenic forms, including inorganic arsenic.
Should a COA show exact numbers or just PASS?
Quantitative values provide more information. A PASS designation can still be useful when the relevant specification is clearly identified, but the actual measured concentration allows much more meaningful interpretation and comparison.
The Bottom Line
A Shilajit lab report should be read as a scientific measurement, not as a marketing badge.
The most useful COA tells you what was tested, which batch or sample it came from, how it was tested, the actual measured values, the units, the laboratory’s detection or quantitation limits where relevant, and the specification used for any pass/fail interpretation.
For a naturally occurring material such as Shilajit, context matters. Detection alone does not establish contamination, and a PASS or FAIL label alone does not replace scientific interpretation.
Consumers should look for transparent sourcing, transparent processing and transparent laboratory data together.
You can review our latest testing information on the Sulaiman Aftabi Lab Reports page or explore our pure Himalayan Shilajit resin.
External references: