Shilajit shoppers are bombarded with numbers: “50% fulvic,” “75% fulvic,” “highest concentration.” These sound impressive—but few realize there’s no universal testing standard for fulvic acid. That gap lets brands cherry-pick loose methods, publish inflated percentages, and hide behind vague COAs. This explainer shows why testing fulvic is tricky, how the LAMAR method raises the bar, and what you should verify before trusting any label claim.
Why Fulvic Is Hard to Measure
- Fulvic isn’t one molecule. It’s a broad class of organic acids—more like a family than a single compound.
- Methods vary wildly. Some labs measure total organic acids; others rely on color reactions that can capture non-fulvic material.
- Older/looser assays inflate %. Results can count humics, ash, or other organics as “fulvic,” making numbers look bigger than they are.
Outcome: one method says 60–75% while a stricter method on the same sample shows ~5–15%. Both are “results,” but only one reflects what buyers think they’re getting.
Enter the LAMAR Method
The LAMAR approach (Liquid Adsorption Method with Advanced Recognition) is widely considered the most precise modern technique for distinguishing fulvic from other humic fractions. Compared with legacy tests, LAMAR:
- Better separates fulvic vs. humic substances, reducing cross-counting.
- Minimizes interference from unrelated organic matter.
- Produces more repeatable, verifiable results across labs using the same protocol.
That’s why LAMAR reads many “high-fulvic” products far lower—often in the realistic ~5–15% range for natural Shilajit. Lower numbers aren’t a flaw; they’re a truer picture of reality when you measure precisely.
When High Numbers Are Real (But Not Natural)
Some products—e.g., standardized fulvic extracts like PrimaVe®—can legitimately show very high percentages (75–90%). Key distinction:
- They’re standardized concentrates made via controlled processing to boost fulvic levels.
- They are not raw Shilajit resins and shouldn’t be marketed as such.
Comparing a concentrated fulvic extract to natural Shilajit is like comparing vitamin C isolate to an orange: one is engineered for potency; the other is a whole-matrix resin. If a label claims “raw Himalayan Shilajit at 75% fulvic,” demand the method and COA—fast.
How Inflated Claims Happen
- Method shopping: choosing looser assays that read higher.
- Vague COAs: reporting a % with no method, no detection limits, no lab accreditation.
- Percentage gymnastics: reporting % relative to a fraction, not the whole sample.
Pro Tip: If a brand touts big numbers but won’t disclose the method (e.g., LAMAR vs. unspecified colorimetry), treat the percentage as marketing—not measurement.
What Buyers Should Verify on a COA
- Batch match: the COA lot number equals your jar’s lot number.
- Named methods: fulvic test method disclosed (ideally LAMAR or equivalent detail); ICP-MS/ICP-OES for heavy metals; accredited microbial assays.
- Lab accreditation: ISO/IEC 17025 or equivalent noted on the report.
- Reasonable ranges: Natural Shilajit commonly lands ~5–15% fulvic; “75%” typically indicates a standardized extract—or a red flag.
For broader quality context, review the WHO Guidelines for Quality Control of Herbal Materials and USP resources on elemental impurities.
Why This Matters for Shilajit Buyers
Shilajit is frequently adulterated (fillers, perfumes, waxes) and can be contaminated with heavy metals or microbes. Inflated “fulvic %” claims make low-quality products look premium. Without method transparency, consumers can’t compare apples to apples—or protect themselves.
Proof Over Promises (American Grit)
American Grit publishes batch-matched COAs for every lot, including fulvic %, heavy metals, and microbial results—with methods disclosed. Our fulvic is U.S.-sourced and produced via water extraction + fermentation (no harsh solvents, no perfumes, no sweeteners). Compare receipts, not hype.
Related Reading (Build Your Know-How)
- Why “75% Fulvic Acid” Claims in Shilajit Are a Red Flag
- Is Shilajit Really from the Himalayas?
- What Does Real Shilajit Taste Like?
No. Independent testing often shows these claims are exaggerated or false. For example, BetterAlt advertised 75% fulvic acid, but third-party COAs revealed levels closer to 6%. Natural Shilajit rarely contains such high concentrations unless it’s artificially standardized. Always request a certificate of analysis (COA) with the testing method included.
Not at all. The term “Himalayan” is often used as a marketing buzzword. True quality depends on lab testing, not just geographic claims. Pure Shilajit must be verified for heavy metals, microbial safety, and actual fulvic content.
A COA is only valuable if it matches the exact batch number on your product and comes from an accredited lab. Unscrupulous sellers often reuse outdated or generic COAs. Check that the testing method (e.g., LAMAR or ICP-MS) is listed and that the report looks professional and verifiable.
No. Authentic Shilajit should be a single natural substance. If you see extra ingredients like sweeteners, preservatives, or “proprietary blends,” the product is likely diluted or adulterated. Real Shilajit doesn’t need additives.
Price alone doesn’t prove authenticity. Some brands inflate prices to appear premium, while others keep costs low by cutting quality. The true sign of quality is third-party lab testing and transparency. Brands like American Grit back their claims with documented analysis, ensuring consumers get genuine fulvic-rich Shilajit.