The creator compliance standard
The rules, published where anyone can read them.
These are the rules a creator must follow when talking about peptides on our behalf. We publish them openly rather than behind a partner login, so a reader, a journalist or a regulator can hold us to the same standard we hold our partners to. Free to read, free to reuse, no application required.
If you are not a partner and never intend to be, this page is still for you: it is the clearest statement we have of what we think is and is not honest to say about a peptide. Take it and use it.
The claims perimeter
Six rules, each with the sentence that breaks it.
Abstract rules do not survive contact with a caption. So every rule carries the compliant version and the version we see constantly, side by side.
Availability
Never state or imply that a gated molecule can be obtained. Not "available", not "in stock", not "back soon", not "DM me".
BPC-157 is not something you can get through a legitimate route today. Here is where its FDA status actually stands.
BPC-157 is finally back — link in bio.
The first is a dated fact about a regulatory position. The second is an availability claim, and it is the single fastest way to make us both a target.
Legality
Never call a peptide legal or illegal as a flat state. Say what the rule currently says, and link the tracker so the reader can check the date.
It was removed from Category 2 in April 2026. That is not the same as lawful to compound, and it is not availability.
Peptides are legal again as of 2026.
Four different regulatory states get collapsed into one word. Every one of them has a different answer.
FDA approval
Say "compounded, not FDA-approved" whenever you name a compounded product. Not in a description, not in a pinned comment — in the content itself.
Compounded semaglutide is not FDA-approved. The branded versions are; the compounded version is a different regulatory thing.
FDA-approved weight-loss medication, prescribed online.
Describing a compounded medicine as FDA-approved is the misstatement with the most regulatory exposure in this category. There is no version of it that is acceptable.
Outcome claims
No guarantees, no superlatives, no unsourced numbers. If you cite a figure, name the trial and say it is an average, not a promise.
In one randomised human trial the average reduction was [figure] over [period] — that is an average across a population, not a prediction for you.
Lose 20% of your body weight, guaranteed.
Nobody can guarantee a biological result. A guarantee is a claim about the seller, not the medicine.
Dosing
Zero dosing content. No amounts, no units, no schedules, no titration, no reconstitution, no "what I take". Not even as personal experience.
A clinician sets any dose after reviewing your history. I am not going to tell you what I take, because it is not information that transfers.
I run 250mcg twice daily for four weeks, then cycle off.
Dosing content published by a non-clinician is practising medicine at scale. It is the fastest route from marketing problem to regulatory problem.
PCAC framing
An advisory-committee recommendation is advice to the FDA. It starts rulemaking. Say so every time it comes up.
The committee recommended six of seven peptides in July 2026. A recommendation is not approval, not authorisation to compound, and not availability — rulemaking is pending.
The FDA just approved BPC-157.
The committee is not the FDA and a recommendation is not an approval. This one gets repeated constantly and it is wrong every time.
The live do-not-promote list
22 molecules nobody may promote as obtainable.
This list is generated from our tracker data every time the page loads. It is not hand-maintained, so it cannot go stale — and stale compliance guidance is worse than none. Two signals are shown separately, because they answer different questions and they often disagree.
For every molecule on this list you may explain what it is, what the evidence says, and where its regulatory status stands. You may not say, imply, hint or joke that it can be obtained — and that includes an amber "under review" molecule, which is exactly where the temptation lives.
FTC material connection
Paste these. Do not paraphrase them.
Disclosure is mandatory, conspicuous and unavoidable. It goes where the reader sees it before they act — not in a description, not in a link-in-bio, not in a pinned comment.
#ad — paid partnership with Peptós.LIFE
On screen, in the first three seconds, and said out loud. Not only in the caption, and never only in a pinned comment.
Paid partnership with Peptós.LIFE. I earn a commission if you use my link.
Spoken in the first thirty seconds AND on screen, plus the platform's own paid-promotion toggle. The description alone is not disclosure.
Disclosure: paid partnership with Peptós.LIFE. I earn a commission on referrals through my link.
Above the link and above the fold — before the reader has to click "see more".
This email contains an affiliate link to Peptós.LIFE. I earn a commission if you sign up through it.
In the body, before the link. Not in the template footer.
#ad · paid partnership with Peptós.LIFE
On every frame that carries the link, not only the first. Frames get skipped.
Pre-cleared angles
Six things you can say without asking us.
All education or waitlist, all routed to a page that cannot be misread as an offer. Use the angle and the destination together — the destination is what keeps the claim honest.
- "Is this peptide actually legal yet?"
Routes to a dated regulatory position with the docket linked. No availability claim is possible because the destination separates the rule from access.
- "What the July 2026 advisory vote did and did not do"
Our own published record, dated, with the primary sources. You are pointing at journalism, not making a claim.
- "503A vs 503B — why the pharmacy category matters"
Education about a regulatory distinction. Nothing about it can be read as an offer.
- "How to tell a real provider from a storefront"
A checklist that names no company, including a section on where we currently fail it. Linkable without endorsing anything.
- "What the evidence grade on this molecule actually means"
Method, not outcome. The honest framing does the persuading.
- "Get told when the status changes"
Education-and-waitlist only. No molecule is named as obtainable, so there is nothing to overclaim.
Prohibited
Traffic and behaviour that ends the relationship.
- Bidding on our brand name, trademarks, or close misspellings in paid search.
- Incentivized traffic — cashback, points, sweepstakes entries, or anything that pays the user to click.
- Cookie stuffing, forced clicks, iframe injection, toolbar or extension-based attribution.
- Any "buy now", "order", "in stock" or cart framing on a gated peptide.
- Dosing, protocol, cycling or reconstitution content of any kind.
- Adult, hate, or piracy placements, and any site whose primary traffic is grey-market sourcing.
- Unsolicited email or DMs, comment spam, and posting into forums against their own rules.
- Claiming an endorsement, partnership or clinical affiliation we have not signed and published.
- Impersonating a clinician, or presenting your own experience in a way that reads as clinical advice.
- Sourcing, reselling, or linking research-chemical vendors alongside our link.
The link rule
Every affiliate link carries rel="sponsored".
Every link you place under this programme carries rel="sponsored". No exceptions, no "but it's just a mention", no "it's only in the description". The reason it sticks: a paid link without that attribute is an undisclosed paid link to a search engine, which puts your domain and ours at risk to buy nothing — the disclosure costs you no ranking and no revenue, and the omission can cost both of us the asset.
If you are writing editorially and were not paid for that specific placement, do not add sponsored to a link that is genuinely editorial. The attribute describes the relationship, and misdescribing it in either direction is the same error.
Enforcement
What happens when a rule is broken.
- An availability, legality, FDA-approval or dosing claim ends the relationship immediately. Not a warning, not a strike. Those four are the ones that create real exposure for a reader, so there is no graduated response.
- A disclosure or link-attribute failure gets one correction window. We tell you what to change and by when. Uncorrected, it becomes a termination.
- Everything else is a conversation first. Most problems are a caption written quickly, not bad faith, and we would rather fix the caption.
- Reporting a violation. Anyone can report one — you do not have to be a partner, and you do not have to tell us who you are. Email hello@peptos.life with COMPLIANCE in the subject and a link. We will tell you what we did about it.
Commission terms are on application — we are not publishing a rate we have not set. The programme itself, and the application, are at /partners. This page stays public and unpaid whether you apply or not.
Last reviewed · do-not-promote list generated from tracker data at page load, last synced July 26, 2026 · Peptós.LIFE · Not medical advice.