A documentation checklist for peptide research suppliers

Make the comparison reproducible

Compare the same kind of information across suppliers. Use columns for material, batch document, report issuer, stated destination countries, delivery terms and returns. Record the date and source of each observation. This is a document comparison, not a medical ranking.

Separate evidence from a claim

A product-page statement and a batch-specific report are different records. Follow the COA checklist to identify tests, limits and results. If a document cannot be matched to the batch or verified with its issuer, explain that limitation. Do not award an unexplained “verified” badge.

Check the transaction terms

Read the merchant’s shipping destinations, payment options and return rules before following a commercial link. Mark a price or availability as unknown when it has not been checked. PeptideAtlas does not collect payments or fulfil orders; the merchant handles those steps.

Keep clinical research separate

Clinical trials study medicines under a defined protocol. A clinical result about a molecule does not establish the quality of a material sold by another supplier. EMA explains that clinical trials contribute to evaluating medicines; they are not interchangeable with catalogue documentation.

Research labels are not authorisation

FDA warns about unapproved GLP-1 products marketed for human use despite research labels. That is US regulatory information, not a blanket conclusion about every EU supplier. A label alone is insufficient evidence that a product is an authorised medicine. Check the applicable regulator separately.

Primary sources

• EMA: clinical trials in human medicines
• FDA: concerns with unapproved GLP-1 drugs