Editorial policy

Not all sources carry equal weight. We work from a strict hierarchy when researching and citing claims:

1. PubMed-indexed peer-reviewed studies. Randomized controlled trials, meta-analyses, and systematic reviews from indexed journals form the foundation of every article. These are the only acceptable sources for safety, efficacy, mechanism, and dosing claims.
2. Peer-reviewed journals not yet on PubMed. Smaller specialty journals are acceptable when the work is methodologically sound and corroborated by indexed literature.
3. FDA prescribing information. For FDA-approved compounds (semaglutide, tirzepatide, liraglutide, etc.), the official label is authoritative for indication, dose, and contraindications. We always cross-check label claims against current literature.
4. ClinicalTrials.gov registrations. Useful for trial design, primary endpoints, and posted results. Cited explicitly when the underlying paper is not yet published.
5. Preprints (bioRxiv, medRxiv).Cited only with explicit "preliminary" framing. Never used as standalone support for a clinical recommendation.
6. Practitioner forums and Reddit.Used only for community context, never as evidence. We may reference "the most commonly stacked combo" or "the protocol most researchers run" with the understanding that this signals popularity, not validity.

Every article must satisfy a minimum citation bar:

• At least three PubMed-linked citations per article. Deep-dives target five to eight.
• Citations are formatted as [Author et al. (YEAR)](pubmed-url), linking to the actual PMID landing page.
• No fabricated PMIDs. If a citation cannot be verified, it is removed or kept as plain text with no link.
• Specific data points required.A citation must accompany a real number, percentage, dose, or trial name. "Studies show X works" is not a citation.
• Major mechanism, safety, or efficacy claims must be citable. Anecdotal or community-level claims are framed as such.

Beyond sourcing, every article on this site must satisfy a structural bar before it goes live:

• Mandatory key takeaways.Every article opens with three to five one-line takeaways above the main body. Each must contain a specific data point: a dose, a percentage, a half-life, a trial name. A reader who only reads the takeaway box should walk away informed. Vague takeaways like "shows promise" fail review.
• Specific data over vague claims.We do not write "studies show it works." We write "24.2% body weight reduction at 48 weeks (Jastreboff et al. 2023, NEJM)." Every major mechanism, dose, or outcome claim must include a number, an author, or a trial name.
• Plain language, no filler.We maintain an internal banned phrase list that catches generic, hollow language: "in the world of," "let's dive in," "game-changer," "unlock," "navigate," "landscape," "realm," and dozens more. Articles containing these phrases get rewritten before publication. Em dashes are also banned site-wide for stylistic consistency.
• Internal linking discipline. Every article includes at least five internal links to compound guides, stack pages, calculators, or other articles. Orphan pages with no internal links pointing in are flagged in audit.
• Version control. When an article is edited, the updatedAt date is set to the day of the edit. Articles older than 12 months without an update are flagged for re-review against current literature.

Before any article is published, it passes through the following gates:

• PMID verification. Each PubMed link is opened and the cited data is confirmed against the abstract or full text.
• Cross-reference check. Major claims are cross-checked against at least two independent sources where possible.
• Dose accuracy. Every dose mentioned is cross-checked against the trial that produced it. We do not aggregate or average doses across heterogeneous studies without saying so.
• Half-life and pharmacokinetics. Numeric PK values are pulled from published clinical or preclinical PK studies, not from secondary summaries.
• Publication date hygiene. The updatedAt field is set to the day of the most recent substantive edit. Articles older than 12 months are flagged for re-review.

We earn revenue from affiliate partnerships. Specifically:

• Ascension Peptides for injectable research peptides, blends, and stacks. Readers who use code ENHANCED at checkout receive a discount, and we earn a commission on the sale.
• Limitless Biotech for oral capsules and nasal sprays. Readers who use code ENHANCED at checkout receive a discount, and we earn a commission on the sale.

You never pay more for using our links. The discount you receive is greater than or equal to the standard public price at each partner. Our commission comes from the partner's margin, not from a markup on you.

Editorial decisions about what to cover, how to cover it, and which compounds to flag with safety concerns are kept independent of partner relationships. A partner cannot pay for placement, and we do not soften coverage of safety concerns to protect a partner's sales.

We disclose the affiliate relationship on every article that contains a partner link, in the global site footer, and on our terms page.

We do not accept the following:

• Sponsored content. No vendor pays us to write or rewrite an article.
• Paid placements in articles. A vendor cannot purchase a mention, a link, or a position in a comparison.
• Free product in exchange for coverage. We do not run product reviews tied to comped vials.
• Guest posts from vendors. Every article is written and edited under our own editorial process.

We make mistakes. When we find one (or you do) we fix it quickly and transparently:

• Minor copy edits (typos, broken formatting, dead links) are fixed without comment and the updatedAt field is bumped.
• Material corrections to dose, safety, efficacy, or mechanism claims are made in-place, the updatedAt field is bumped, and a brief note is added at the bottom of the article describing what changed and why.
• Retractions. If an entire article is no longer defensible, we retract it. The URL is replaced with a retraction notice explaining the reason. We do not silently delete content.

To report a factual error, email us at hello@peptides-enhanced.com with the article URL and the specific issue. We respond within 7 days.

Articles are bylined to our editorial team. The site is operated pseudonymously by Cloak One GmbH, a German consulting firm; full operator disclosure lives on our Impressum. We do not invent fake doctor names or board certifications. If we ever attach individual author bios with verifiable credentials, those credentials will be linkable and checkable.

If you believe an article is inaccurate, misleading, or harmful, contact us at hello@peptides-enhanced.com. Include the article URL, the specific claim you are questioning, and a primary source if you have one. We acknowledge complaints within 7 days and resolve them within 30.