Last updated 2026-09-06
We pull records straight from PubMed and ClinicalTrials.gov. Company facts come from Peptara Labs' own published pages, and every claim links the document behind it.
We don't cite anything we didn't retrieve. When a check was blocked, we say so instead of implying it passed.
Grades come from the record, never from how often a pair is marketed together.
We count and show them separately everywhere, and never merge them into one total. Animal and lab work shows a mechanism is plausible. It doesn't tell you what happens in people.
The interaction checker adds our mechanism reading on top of the record grade. It's labelled as ours, it describes how two mechanisms relate, and it never claims a health outcome.
Two compounds acting on the same receptor are described as redundant. Two acting on different receptors toward the same end are not.
An independent, adversarial check reviews each compound page and flags any figure its cited sentence doesn't support. We act on what it finds.
One example: a compound's animal table lost some figures after that check found they belonged to a different compound, used as a comparator in the same studies.
We state Peptara Labs' published gaps, including products without a certificate, in the same terms as its strengths.
We fix errors in place, with a dated note, instead of quietly editing. If we can't trace a figure to its source, we remove it instead of rewording it.
whatpeptidestostack