How We Research

We are not licensed clinicians, and our content is not medically reviewed. What we offer instead is a transparent, repeatable method: every clinical claim is traced to a primary source, weighed by the strength of the evidence behind it, and kept current. Here is exactly how that works.

Our sourcing hierarchy

We draw on publicly available, authoritative sources, in this order of preference:

  1. Peer-reviewed literature — PubMed/PMC-indexed studies, cited with PMID or DOI links.
  2. FDA — drug labeling, approvals, and bulk-substance/compounding guidance.
  3. ClinicalTrials.gov and registered trial records.
  4. Institutional clinical guidelines and government health agencies.
  5. Reputable health media, used only to point back to the underlying primary source.

Where only anecdotal or community evidence exists, we say so explicitly and label it as such.

Our citation standard

We tie every clinical number — a dose, an efficacy figure, a safety finding, an approval status — to a verifiable primary source, linked by PMID, DOI, or an official FDA/government URL. If a figure cannot be verified during drafting, it is withheld rather than published. We never invent a citation, PMID, trial number, or author.

How we grade the evidence

Peptide claims vary enormously in how well they are supported. Rather than rely on an individual reviewer's judgment, we apply a mechanical, transparent scale based on the kind of evidence that exists — so "how strong is this?" is something you can check, not something you have to take on faith.

Tier 1
Strongest. Multiple human randomized controlled trials (or a meta-analysis of them), or FDA approval for the specific use being discussed.
Tier 2
Moderate. At least one human RCT or strong human cohort/observational data.
Tier 3
Emerging. Human pilot studies, case series, or off-label clinical use without RCTs.
Tier 4
Preclinical. Animal-model or in-vitro evidence only — not yet shown in humans.
Tier 5
Anecdotal. Mechanistic theory or community/anecdotal reports, labeled as such.

What we deliberately don't do

These limits are a choice, not a gap — they are what keeps our content honest:

  • We do not provide medical advice, diagnoses, or personalized protocols.
  • We do not claim that our content is medically reviewed, and we do not attach clinician bylines we cannot verify. All content is attributed to the Peptides.NYC Editorial Team.
  • We do not sell peptides or endorse vendors for payment.

For the full standards, see our editorial policy. Always consult a licensed healthcare provider before acting on anything you read here.

Keeping content current

Peptide science and regulation move quickly. Articles carry a visible "last updated" date, and we revise them as new evidence, trials, or FDA actions emerge. When we correct a factual error, we log it publicly — see our corrections & updates log.