Standards
Editorial policy
These are the rules every article on this site follows. They're here so you can trust that what you read is honest, useful, and clear about what we don't know.
Last updated July 5, 2026
Our promise
We write helpful, honest guides about peptides in skincare — for a real person making a real choice. Not to game Google, and not to sell you something at any cost.
Every article must include
- A direct answer near the top, so a reader (or an AI assistant) gets the point immediately.
- Clear definitions of any technical term.
- An honest “can claim / can’t claim” breakdown for ingredients.
- A “what this does not mean” section to prevent overreading.
- Sources and a last-updated date.
- An identified author and, where applicable, review status.
How we handle claims
Cosmetic products may make appearance claims (the look of firmness, fine lines, hydration), not medical ones. We hold our own writing to that standard and flag marketing that crosses the line. When evidence is weak, we say so. When a study is manufacturer-funded or small, we note it. We never present in-vitro (lab-dish) or injectable research as if it proves what a topical cream will do.
Language we avoid
- “Clinically proven” without an accessible, relevant study.
- “Reverses ageing,” “erases wrinkles,” “boosts collagen” as stated medical outcomes.
- “Topical Botox” and similar drug comparisons for cosmetics.
- Guarantees of results.
Independence
We are not owned by, or affiliated with, any peptide manufacturer or skincare brand. Any future commercial relationship (such as a recommended or own-brand product) will be disclosed clearly on the relevant page.
Updates
Peptide science and regulation evolve. We revisit articles as evidence changes and stamp each page with its last-updated date. Significant changes are logged under our corrections policy.