How claims are graded

Peptide claims spread fast because they usually sound specific enough to be convincing and broad enough to apply to almost anyone. Peptide Fact Checks reviews the exact claim as written, then grades the evidence behind that claim only.

Public evidence checks require a verdict, grade, source list, and last-reviewed date. High-risk claims involving disease treatment, dosing, injections, legal status, or vendor accusations require human approval before publication.

Grades

• A: Strong human clinical or approved-label evidence for the exact claim context.
• B: Limited or early human evidence that still needs narrower interpretation.
• C: Animal, in vitro, or mechanistic evidence without solid human confirmation.
• D: Anecdotal, influencer, vendor, or insufficient evidence only.
• F: Contradicted, misleading, unsafe, or unsupported in the reviewed context.
• R: Regulatory concern, restricted claim, or claim that needs extra caution before public interpretation.

Publishing gates

Peptide Fact Checks does not publish dosing guidance, self-administration instructions, protocols, or personalized medical advice. Affiliate availability, sponsorship, or commission rate does not determine a verdict or evidence grade.