How We Test Our Shilajit

Shilajit is one of the most adulterated supplements on the market. It is also one of the most tested by serious buyers. We think that is the right instinct, and we have designed our testing programme to hold up to scrutiny, not just to pass it.

Every origin we stock is independently tested by EkotechLAB Marek Klein S.K.A., a specialist analytical chemistry laboratory based in Gdansk, Poland. Their heavy metals testing carries PCA accreditation (AB 1755) under the ILAC-MRA framework, an international mutual recognition arrangement covering laboratories in over 100 countries. In practical terms, this means our heavy metals results are recognised as equivalent to those produced by accredited labs anywhere in the world.

What follows is a full account of what we test, why each test matters, and what the results tell you about the product in your hands.

Why we chose EkotechLAB

There are larger, more recognisable names in the testing industry. Eurofins is the most commonly used by supplement brands, and it is cheap, fast, and widely accepted. It is also a generalised, high-volume operation that outsources a significant proportion of its testing to third-party subcontractors. Many of the tests it produces are not themselves accredited, and the chain of custody between sample submission and result can be difficult to trace. For brands that need a certificate to put on a shelf, it serves its purpose.

We wanted something different. EkotechLAB are specialist analytical chemists, not a conveyor belt. The tests they run for us are conducted by their own scientists in their own facility, using methods that are fully accredited where accreditation exists for those methods. When we ask them a question about methodology or interpretation, we get a direct, technically informed answer.

That matters when you are trying to understand what a result actually means, not just whether it passes.

Why testing methodology matters more than any single number

Before you look at any results, it is worth understanding that not all shilajit testing is equal, and that the method chosen to measure humic substances can change a reported figure dramatically.

Many people assume fulvic acid percentage is the headline measure of shilajit quality. We think that framing is too narrow. The most meaningful picture of a shilajit comes from reading the full spectrum of what has been measured: humic acids, fulvic acids, the mineral and trace element profile, and what the testing does not find as much as what it does. A single high fulvic acid figure tells you one thing. A complete analytical profile tells you considerably more.

That said, how fulvic acid is measured matters enormously. We use an analytical method aligned with the standards of the International Humic Substances Society (IHSS), implemented under ISO 19822:2018. This is the reference method used by the scientific community for humic substance analysis. It is precise, reproducible, and internationally recognised.

Many suppliers use titration-based methods instead. Titration measures anything that behaves chemically like a fulvic acid, including compounds that are not fulvic acids at all. The result is a systematically inflated figure. A product tested by titration might report 80% fulvic acid. The same product tested under ISO 19822:2018 might return 40%. These numbers are not comparable, and customers who try to compare fulvic acid percentages across brands without knowing the testing method used are not comparing like with like.

Our results are lower than some you will see advertised. That is not a weakness. It reflects honest measurement.

What each test reveals

The full-spectrum picture: humic acids, fulvic acids, and mineral profile together

The ratio of humic to fulvic acids is not just a quality measure. It is a characteristic of the resin itself, reflecting both the geology of the source region and the degree of processing applied to the raw material.

A higher fulvic acid percentage can indicate a more purified product. But aggressive purification and filtration to concentrate fulvic acids will typically reduce humic acid content and strip out a proportion of the naturally occurring mineral profile. Our Hunza results illustrate this clearly: 64.13% fulvic acid, but only 1.16% humic acid and a comparatively modest mineral profile. Compare that to our Kashmiri at 18.59% humic and 44.87% fulvic, or the Siberian Altai at 5.8% humic and 41.19% fulvic, both of which retain richer humic and mineral profiles alongside their fulvic acid content.

Whether that trade-off is desirable is an open scientific question. Our view is that the full-spectrum composition of the resin, humic acids, fulvic acids, and the mineral matrix together, is likely more meaningful than any single figure in isolation. We present the complete picture and let you decide.

Mineral profile as geographic fingerprint

The mineral composition of a shilajit sample is one of the strongest indicators of its geographic origin. Different mountain ranges have fundamentally different geology, and the organic matter formed within them carries a distinct mineral signature as a result.

Strontium levels are characteristically elevated in shilajit from sedimentary limestone regions because strontium substitutes for calcium in carbonate minerals. Our Kashmiri sample returned 364 mg/kg strontium, the highest of any origin we stock, and consistent with the limestone-dominant sedimentary basin of the Kashmir Valley. Sodium and phosphorus distributions differ markedly between Siberian and Mongolian Altai sources despite both originating from the same mountain range. Iron concentrations in Siberian Altai, at 923 mg/kg, are among the highest of any shilajit origin, reflecting the ancient iron-rich Precambrian rock formations of the region.

A mineral profile that is inconsistent with the claimed origin is a meaningful red flag. One that is consistent with it is not proof of authenticity on its own, but it is a supporting data point that an adulterated or mislabelled product would struggle to replicate convincingly.

Heavy metals

Lead, cadmium, mercury, arsenic, silver, chromium, copper, nickel, and vanadium are all tested across our range. Our results are well within safe limits across all origins.

It is worth noting that trace arsenic levels, 0.7 mg/kg in our Siberian Altai, are geologically expected and not a cause for concern. The absence of any detectable arsenic in a product claiming Siberian origin would actually be the more suspicious result.

Mycotoxins

Mycotoxins are toxic compounds produced by certain moulds. They can be present in natural organic materials where moisture or inadequate handling during harvest or storage creates conditions for fungal growth. We test for aflatoxins B1, B2, G1 and G2, ochratoxin A, deoxynivalenol, and zearalenone on origins where the risk profile warrants it. All results have returned below detection limits. We are working towards extending mycotoxin screening across all origins as part of our ongoing quality programme.

Solvent residues (Siberian Altai)

One of the most common adulteration methods in the shilajit market involves using organic solvents to extract or artificially concentrate fulvic acid content. We test for seven solvent compounds in our Siberian Altai. All returned below 10 mg/kg, the limit of detection for the method used. Clean solvent results are evidence of a genuine resin extraction process, not a solvent-assisted one.

Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) (Siberian Altai)

PAHs including benzo[a]pyrene, benzo[a]anthracene, benzo[b]fluoranthene and chrysene can enter shilajit through improper drying or heating during processing. All four returned below 0.2 mg/kg. These results are a processing integrity marker as much as a safety one.

Microbiology (Siberian Altai)

Coliforms, Salmonella, coagulase-positive staphylococci, and yeast and mould counts were all tested. Salmonella was not detected. All other counts returned below 10 cfu/g.

Water content

Water content affects concentration. A lower water content indicates a denser, more concentrated resin. Our results range from 2.57% in Hunza to 7.42% in Mongolian Altai. A drier, firmer resin is sometimes mistaken by customers for a lower quality product. In fact, the opposite is generally true.

Our results by origin