Corrections policy

How we handle errors

• Minor fixes (typos, broken links, clarity edits) are made without a formal note.
• Substantive corrections (anything affecting the meaning of a claim) are made promptly, and the article’s last-updated date is changed.
• Significant corrections will be noted on the affected article and, where relevant, logged below.

Report a problem

If you spot an inaccuracy, an outdated claim, or a source you think we’ve misread, please tell us via the contact page. We take corrections from readers seriously, especially from professionals in dermatology, pharmacy, and cosmetic science.

Correction log

Substantive corrections, newest first.

September 15, 2026

SS-31 (elamipretide): the page said elamipretide had not been approved by the FDA or any major regulator. That was out of date. The FDA granted it accelerated approval, as Forzinity, on September 19, 2025, for Barth syndrome. The page was rewritten, and related guides were updated.

PT-141 and peptides for sex drive: a citation (PMID 31599840) was labeled with the title of a different paper from the same trial program. The label now matches the source. The claims it supports were unchanged.

Cagrilintide, cagrilintide vs pramlintide and pramlintide: the pages described cagrilintide as still in early trials and “not approved anywhere”. That was out of date and broader than we had checked. Phase 3 results are published, the CagriSema combination was submitted to the FDA in December 2025, and it is not approved in the US or EU as of this date.

Larazotide: the page said late-stage trials did not show enough benefit, called it the most clinically tested peptide of its kind, and said it was sold as a research chemical. None of those could be supported. The page now reports what the trials and the registry record show, and a citation that did not mention larazotide was removed.

BPC-157: the page listed gut problems among its studied uses without saying that almost all of that work is in animals. It now says the only human gut data is a 2005 conference abstract, which the FDA found inadequate.

How to choose a peptide serum and Matrixyl: we advised looking for peptides high on the ingredient list. In the US, ingredients at 1% or less can be listed in any order, so list position does not show how much peptide a product has. We also said no independent group had repeated the main Matrixyl study; a small 2023 university-run trial exists, and the pages now describe it.

Ecnoglutide: the page said ecnoglutide gave better blood sugar control than dulaglutide. The trial found a statistically significant difference that its authors did not consider clinically relevant. We also said all research was in China; the oral version is now in US trials.

MariTide: the page described it as tested on a monthly schedule. Trials give it every 4 weeks, and the longer schedules some groups are testing are not proven. The page now says that, and lists each Phase 3 trial with its registry status.

September 7, 2026

Peptides for hair growth: the page recommended copper peptides. We found no controlled human trial of a copper peptide scalp product, so the page was rewritten to say so.

GHK-Cu and peptides for anti-aging: both implied human studies showed firmer skin. The only randomized facial trial we found showed no significant objective improvement. Both pages now say that, and a conflict of interest in the supporting reviews is disclosed.

Several regulatory guides: a claim about a Medsafe consumer warning could not be verified and was removed, and a claim about false labeling on compounded weight-loss drugs was narrowed to what FDA sources confirm. Across 24 guides, general source descriptions were replaced with specific citations.