Policy

Medical review limitations

What medical review on Peptide Authority certifies — regulatory accuracy and evidence presentation — and what it explicitly does not certify: clinical applicability to an individual reader.

Last reviewed: 2026-05-20

Some Peptide Authority pages carry a “medically reviewed by” line. This page explains what that review covers — and, more importantly, what it does not.

What medical review covers

A medical reviewer signs off that, at the date listed:

Regulatory framing matches their understanding of current UK rules (MHRA status, NICE position, NHS commissioning where relevant).
Evidence summaries match their reading of the published literature and the evidence-grading methodology.
Safety information matches their clinical understanding of the compound class and any UK Drug Safety Updates issued before the review date.
The page does not contain claims that the reviewer would consider overstated, misleading, or commercially motivated.

What medical review explicitly does not cover

Personal clinical applicability. A medical reviewer does not know your medical history, your current medications, your comorbidities, your goals, or your contraindications. A reviewer credit on a page is not a recommendation that you should — or should not — consider any compound discussed.
Dosing or administration guidance for unlicensed compounds. We do not publish doses, reconstitution recipes, or injection technique for compounds that are not licensed UK medicines. A reviewer credit does not change this position. See no dosing, no sourcing.
Supplier or clinic endorsement. Medical reviewers do not approve, recommend, or endorse any retailer, prescriber, clinic, or compounding pharmacy by name.
Diagnostic, prescribing, or treatment authority. A reviewer credit does not establish a doctor–patient relationship between the reviewer and you. The reviewer has not assessed you and has no clinical responsibility for any decision you make based on the page.
Temporal accuracy after the review date. Regulation changes; trial data is published; safety signals emerge. We re-review on schedule (typically every 6-12 months for high-risk pages, longer for stable reference pages), but a reviewer credit is a snapshot, not a guarantee.

If you need a personal clinical opinion

Speak to a GMC-registered doctor or a GPhC-registered pharmacist who can assess your specific situation. The NHS GP registration guide explains how to find a GP. NHS 111 is available for non-emergency clinical advice. For mental-health crisis, call 999 or attend A&E.

If the page itself contains a factual error

Please send it to us via the corrections process. We treat regulatory and evidence errors as urgent.

What medical review covers

A medical reviewer signs off that, at the date listed:

Regulatory framing matches their understanding of current UK rules (MHRA status, NICE position, NHS commissioning where relevant).

Evidence summaries match their reading of the published literature and the evidence-grading methodology.

Safety information matches their clinical understanding of the compound class and any UK Drug Safety Updates issued before the review date.

The page does not contain claims that the reviewer would consider overstated, misleading, or commercially motivated.

What medical review explicitly does not cover

Personal clinical applicability. A medical reviewer does not know your medical history, your current medications, your comorbidities, your goals, or your contraindications. A reviewer credit on a page is not a recommendation that you should — or should not — consider any compound discussed.

Dosing or administration guidance for unlicensed compounds. We do not publish doses, reconstitution recipes, or injection technique for compounds that are not licensed UK medicines. A reviewer credit does not change this position. See no dosing, no sourcing.

Supplier or clinic endorsement. Medical reviewers do not approve, recommend, or endorse any retailer, prescriber, clinic, or compounding pharmacy by name.

Diagnostic, prescribing, or treatment authority. A reviewer credit does not establish a doctor–patient relationship between the reviewer and you. The reviewer has not assessed you and has no clinical responsibility for any decision you make based on the page.

Temporal accuracy after the review date. Regulation changes; trial data is published; safety signals emerge. We re-review on schedule (typically every 6-12 months for high-risk pages, longer for stable reference pages), but a reviewer credit is a snapshot, not a guarantee.