Last medically reviewed: October 15, 2026 · This page is informational and does not constitute medical advice.
This page is maintained. Prices are re-read at source and dated; evidence is checked against the published trial. Newest across the site: news · research · corrections.
A publication that never corrects itself is not more accurate than one that does — it is less observable. Every correction is listed in full, with what we said, what is correct and why it mattered.
Corrections are published at the same prominence as the original claim, and affected pages carry the correction inline rather than being edited silently.
· COR-006 · Material — provider facts
NexLife figures across review, compare and price pages
What we said: NexLife’s plans included “laboratory review”; its pharmacy network was Red Rock, Hallandale, Absolute, Empower and DIRx; full-dose tirzepatide was $186 a month on 12 months and $215 month to month; and it was the cheapest microdose and the cheapest no-commitment full-dose program in our set.
What is correct: NexLife’s plan pages, read October 15, 2026, list tirzepatide at $169 month to month and $139 on 12 months, semaglutide at $139 and $119, and name three 503A pharmacies: Absolute Pharmacy (Lutz, FL), Premium Compounding (Decatur, AL) and Boudreaux’s New Drug Store (Lake Charles, LA). No NexLife page we read says lab work is included. Eden publishes lower prices, so we no longer call NexLife the cheapest program.
Why it mattered: NexLife is our editorial pick and the publisher has a financial relationship with it, so its figures need the same first-party read as everyone else’s. Empower Pharmacy, which we listed, received FDA warning letter 738238 on September 18, 2026; NexLife’s plan pages do not name it.
· COR-005 · Material — regulatory status
BPC-157 described as being on FDA’s Category 2 list
What we said: BPC-157 “is on the FDA’s 503A Category 2 bulk drug substances list” (llms.txt, a news item, the glossary and two research pieces).
What is correct: FDA’s Category 2 page (content current as of April 22, 2026) lists BPC-157 under “Bulk drug substances nominated but withdrawn”, with TB-500, CJC-1295 and others. It is not in Category 1 and not on the 503A bulks list, so it is still not a routine compounded peptide. FDA staff recommended against adding it in July 2026; the advisory committee’s vote in favour is non-binding and no rule has been proposed.
Why it mattered: The conclusion stood but the reason we gave was out of date when we published it. A list status is a checkable fact, and we had not re-read the list.
· COR-004 · Material — editorial governance
Medical reviewers named on every page
What we said: Since COR-001 (August 4, 2026), pages carried no named physician reviewer.
What is correct: From October 15, 2026 every page carries an author block naming Dr. Parmis (medical researcher) as researcher and Dr. Jonathan Snipes, MD (NPI 1821250077) and Kim Callender, NP (FNP-BC, NPI 1144661760) as medical reviewers, with the date of the last medical review. The same two reviewers appear in each page’s reviewedBy structured data. Pages whose content did not change keep their earlier review date.
Why it mattered: A reviewer credit is a claim about who checked the clinical content, so adding one is logged the same way as withdrawing one.
· COR-001 · Material — editorial governance
Every page carrying a medical reviewer byline
What we said: We named a physician medical reviewer in the byline of 112 pages and in the reviewedBy property of 24 structured-data blocks.
What is correct: That reviewer credit has been withdrawn from every page, from the structured data, from the editorial board page and from the medical review policy. Pages that previously carried it now show the researcher and the review dates without a named physician reviewer.
Why it mattered: A medical reviewer credit is a claim about who checked the clinical content. Withdrawing it from the visible byline while leaving it in the structured data would retract the claim to readers and keep asserting it to machines. Both were removed together, and the change is published here rather than made silently.
What we said: Trial figures appeared near compounded products without a consistent statement of which product the trial studied.
What is correct: Every efficacy figure on this site was collected on an FDA-approved product. No compounded preparation has a trial of its own, and no figure transfers to one.
Why it mattered: A number placed beside a product implies it describes that product.
· COR-003 · Material — starter price quoted as the price of treatment
Pages quoting the approved oral semaglutide price
What we said: The approved oral semaglutide tablet was described at $149 a month without stating which doses that covers.
What is correct: The manufacturer's own price guide sets $149 for the 1.5 mg and 4 mg doses and $299 for the 9 mg and 25 mg maintenance doses. The $149 rate on 4 mg ends 31 August 2026, after which it becomes $199.
Why it mattered: Quoting a starter-dose figure as the price of treatment is the error this publication documents in provider marketing.
How to report an error
Email the research desk with the page and the figure you believe is wrong. We would rather a figure be found and corrected than repeated.