How our content is reviewed

We follow a scientific-accuracy model: entries are written by our research team and reviewed for scientific accuracy — deliberately not framed as "medically reviewed," because we review research accuracy, not clinical safety, and do not create a clinician-patient relationship.

Honest review status

Every peptide entry shows its review status openly. Where a credentialed reviewer (PhD/PharmD) and primary-literature citations have not yet been added, we say so — a "pending scientific review" state — rather than implying a review that has not happened.

Evidence levels & regulatory status

Each entry carries an honest evidence-level and regulatory-status signal, so you always see what is approved versus experimental versus emerging.

Re-review cadence

Reviewed entries are revisited on a defined cadence and when new trials, regulatory changes, or safety signals appear.