Our methodology

Where the prices come from

Every dollar figure on this site was read on the seller's own pages — the product page, the pricing page, the intake, or the terms of service — and written down with the date we read it. We do not take prices from press coverage, from other review sites, or from a company's sales email, and we do not estimate. If a review says a provider charges $199 a month, that number was printed on a page you can open yourself.

Advertised prices are frequently the twelve-month prepay rate wearing a per-month suffix. Where that is the case we give both figures and say which is which, because the month-to-month price is the one you pay if you try the product and stop.

Three things can be true of a price, and we distinguish them:

• Published and firm. The seller prints a number and nothing in its own documents walks it back.
• Published but not binding. The seller prints a number and then reserves the right to charge something else for the same product — “the final charge may fluctuate”, “final pricing is determined after the online consultation”. We still show the number and still link the company, but it does not get to lead our cheapest-first ranking. We apply this only where we have read the disclaimer on the company's own pages, never on suspicion.
• Not published at all. Some companies show you a price only after an intake, and sometimes only after a charge. We say so and leave the figure blank rather than guessing at it.

Prices in this category move. A number here is a record of what a page said on a given date, not a quote, and the seller's checkout is always the last word.

How we screen for FDA warning letters

Before a provider is written up here, we search the FDA's public warning-letter database for it. The search is run on the company, not on the brand: the legal entity, any “doing business as” name, the parent company where there is one, the pharmacies it names as filling its prescriptions, and its web domains. Brand names are the least reliable thing to search on — the FDA addresses a letter to a registered company, and the name on the letter is routinely not the name on the storefront.

A search that finds nothing and a search that is broken look exactly the same, so every screen includes a company we already know holds a letter. If that company does not come back, the run is thrown away and repeated. It is a small habit and it is the only reason we are willing to publish the sentence “no FDA warning letter on record” at all.

When a letter does exist, we say so on every page that ranks or recommends the company — not only in the review. We give the addressee exactly as the FDA writes it, the month and year, and a link to the database so you can pull the letter yourself. We do not paraphrase what the letter alleges: we did not investigate it, the agency's own words are the better authority, and a summary of an enforcement action is the single likeliest thing on a page like this to be wrong.

A warning letter is a disclosure, not a disqualification. A company that has one stays listed, keeps its position, and keeps its links, with the letter shown beside it. Removing it would leave you with a page that describes a smaller market than the one you are actually shopping in, and with no mention of the letter anywhere.

Clinicians, pharmacies and seals

For each provider we record who is named and who is not: the prescribing clinician or clinical network, the compounding pharmacy that fills the prescription, and the company behind the storefront. Where a clinician's NPI number is published we look it up in the national registry and check that the name, state and specialty match. Where a company displays a certification seal, we check it against the certifier's own lookup rather than trusting the image.

Naming a pharmacy is the single most useful thing a compounding telehealth company can do, because it is what lets anyone — us or you — check the facility's own record. Most do not. When a company names nobody, we say that plainly and let you weigh it.

What we do when we cannot check something

We never turn “we could not find it” into “they do not disclose it”. Those are different claims, and only one of them is about the company.

So when a review says a provider does not name its pharmacy, it means we read its site — the pages where that information lives, listed in the review — on a stated date and the information was not there. When we simply could not confirm something, the review says we could not confirm it. A review has been corrected on exactly this point: an earlier version reported that a company named no pharmacy, when in fact our search had missed the page it was on.

Evidence claims

Claims about what a peptide does are tied to primary sources — peer-reviewed studies or official FDA labeling — cited inline and listed at the foot of the article. The literature on growth-hormone secretagogues is small, mostly short, and mostly in populations that are not the people buying it; where that is true we say so rather than borrowing a seller's confidence. Our editorial policy sets out the standard in full.

Where the money sits

We earn a commission when a reader starts a program through some of our links, at no extra cost to the reader. On our provider boards the companies we have an affiliate relationship with are placed first and the rest follow in our editorial order — that is a commercial placement decision and we would rather state it than let you assume a score you cannot see. Our cheapest-first ranking is deliberately exempt: it sorts on published price alone and breaks ties alphabetically.

What the commission does not touch is what we write. Every price, requirement, contradiction and caveat in a review comes from the company's own pages, the partners' included, and the unflattering ones stay in. Several of the sharpest criticisms on this site are of companies that pay us. The full arrangement is in our affiliate disclosure.

What we do not do

This is a desk-research site, and it is worth being exact about the limits of that.

• We do not have a physician or pharmacist on staff, and no page here has been reviewed by a clinician. Nothing on this site is medical advice — see our medical disclaimer.
• We do not test products. No vial described here has been sent to a laboratory for potency, purity or sterility, by us or on our behalf. Where a company says it third-party tests, we report that it says so.
• We do not buy the products, and we do not submit a medical intake under a false identity. We will read any price a company shows a visitor, but we do not publish a figure that could only have been obtained by posing as a patient — which is why some reviews end with “the price is not published” instead of a number.
• We do not collect or publish customer reviews, star ratings or testimonials, our own or anyone else's.

Reading the dates

A dated line in a review — “screened clean in August 2026”, “$199 a month as of August 2026” — means the check was run then and returned that answer then. It is a record, not a forecast. If you are reading this months later, treat every price as a starting point for your own look at the seller's checkout, and treat a clean regulatory screen as clean up to the date printed beside it.

Found something we got wrong? Email team@somnipeptide.com. Corrections are made in the article, and the page's last-updated date moves with them.