Editorial Policy

PeptidesBeat covers a category — therapeutic peptides — where commercial pressure on coverage is meaningful and the cost of inaccurate information to readers is non-trivial. This policy is the framework we use to keep our incentives aligned with readers and our reporting honest about the state of the evidence.

Sourcing standards

We rely on, in priority order:

1. Primary regulatory documents — FDA Federal Register notices, FDA guidance documents, state pharmacy board rulings, court filings, PCAC dockets.
2. Peer-reviewed scientific literature — indexed in PubMed, with direct citation. Preprints are labeled as preprints.
3. Direct reporting — interviews with named or background sources in the compounding pharmacy industry, regulatory profession, clinical practice, and patient community.
4. Industry trade press — STAT News, Endpoints News, Fierce Pharma, Drug Topics, Pink Sheet — used for context and confirmation, not primary attribution.

We do not source claims from peptide vendor marketing copy, fitness influencer accounts, or unmoderated forum speculation, except to characterize what those sources are claiming.

Evidence standards

Therapeutic peptides span a range of evidence quality. We mark this explicitly on every compound pillar and analysis piece:

• Preclinical evidence — animal-model and in-vitro studies — is labeled as such.
• Human clinical trial evidence — RCTs, observational cohorts, case series — is distinguished from preclinical work.
• Practitioner-reported experience — clinician case reports, patient reports — is acknowledged where it represents the practical use base, but is not described as evidence-equivalent to clinical trials.

Where the evidence base is thin, we say so in plain language. Where mechanistic claims outpace clinical data, we say so. Where a peptide is widely used clinically despite limited published evidence, we cover that situation honestly rather than overclaiming or dismissing.

What we will not publish

• Specific dosing protocols. Dosing is prescriber-determined. We will explain how a peptide is administered in general terms; we will not publish "use 500 mcg twice weekly."
• Anonymized patient stories presented as efficacy claims.
• Forum-sourced advice repackaged as journalism.
• Marketing claims from compounding pharmacies, peptide vendors, or telehealth brands without independent verification.
• Affiliate-linked product recommendations for peptide compounds.

Conflicts of interest and revenue

How we make money — and what we will not make money from — is the foundation of editorial integrity in this category.

How we make money:

• Direct subscriber revenue (free daily brief, forthcoming paid newsletter tier).
• Educational products (the 2026 Peptide Law Playbook and successor publications).
• Pharmacy and prescriber directory listing fees, charged at a flat monthly rate that does not vary by listing position. Position in the directory is editorial and is not for sale.
• Direct sponsorship from advertisers in non-conflicted categories (lab testing, conferences, supplies). All sponsored placements are clearly labeled as such.
• Quarterly research reports published under PeptideReport.org, sold as standalone reports and licensed to industry subscribers.

What we will not make money from, ever:

• Affiliate commissions from compounding pharmacies on prescription fills.
• Sponsored content from peptide-selling telehealth brands.
• Pay-for-placement in our directory.
• Programmatic display advertising networks (AdSense, Mediavine, Raptive, similar).
• Sponsored research reports — our report content is independent of advertiser involvement.

These restrictions cost us revenue we could otherwise capture. We have made the deliberate choice that losing that revenue is the price of being able to publish coverage readers can rely on.

Corrections

We correct factual errors. If you find one, email editorial@peptidesbeat.com with the URL, the specific claim, and the source for the correct information. Material corrections are annotated at the bottom of the corrected article with the date of the correction. Trivial corrections (typo fixes, broken links) are made silently.

Medical disclaimer

PeptidesBeat publishes educational content about therapeutic peptides. We are not your doctor, we are not your pharmacy, and nothing on this site is medical advice. Decisions about peptide use — whether, which one, in what form, at what dose, for what duration, with what monitoring — belong between you and a licensed clinician who has reviewed your individual medical history. If you are considering a peptide protocol, talk to a qualified prescriber. If you are experiencing an adverse event, seek appropriate medical care.

Scope and limitations

We cover peptides that are in active clinical or compounding-pharmacy use in the United States, with special focus on the twelve peptides reclassified by the FDA on April 15, 2026. We may publish contextual coverage of adjacent categories (GLP-1s, hormone optimization, regenerative medicine) where the regulatory or clinical picture overlaps. We do not cover veterinary peptides, athletic-doping programs, or peptides outside the scope of legal U.S. compounding practice except in regulatory or enforcement context.

Last updated: April 24, 2026.