Editorial Standards
How we source, fact-check, and correct our reporting — and how our content is produced. Last updated July 28, 2026.
Peptide News Network is a news and education publication covering peptide science, clinical trials, regulation, and industry. Because much of what we cover falls under what search engines call “Your Money or Your Life” topics — subjects that can affect a reader’s health — we hold our reporting to a documented standard. This page describes that standard so readers can judge our work, and hold us to it.
Primary sources first
Every news story and every compound overview is built from primary sources: peer-reviewed papers, clinical-trial registries, regulatory filings, and official FDA and agency documents. Where a claim rests on a study, we cite that study. Where it rests on a regulatory action, we cite the document. We prefer the original record over secondary coverage, and we link to it so you can read it yourself. Every article carries a Sources section for exactly this reason.
Our research library sorts compounds into four evidence tiers by the strength of their published evidence and their regulatory standing — never by popularity or marketing. A tier is a reading aid that tells you how well established something is, not a verdict on whether it works.
Fact-checking
Before an article is published, its factual claims are checked against the primary sources it cites. We aim to describe what a study actually observed, within the population and conditions it studied — not what a claim has grown into as it travels across the internet. When evidence is preliminary, contested, or drawn only from animals or cells, we say so plainly rather than rounding it up. We do not report dosing protocols or treatment recommendations as editorial voice.
How our content is produced
Our reporting is produced with the help of research and drafting tools, always under human editorial oversight. No article is published on the strength of those tools alone: every piece is checked against the primary sources it cites before it goes live, and responsibility for the site’s accuracy and standards rests with a named human editor.
Authorship and expertise
The site is edited by Ian Gauntt, RN, BSN, founder and editor, a registered nurse with nearly a decade of critical-care experience. His clinical background informs how the reporting reads the evidence. He is not, in this role, acting as anyone’s clinician, and — as stated throughout the Site — nothing we publish is individualized medical advice. Where an article has been reviewed by a named subject-matter expert, that review is credited on the article itself.
Accuracy, updates, and dating
Peptide science moves quickly. When new evidence changes a story, we update the article and mark the revision date rather than quietly editing the record. A regulatory status or trial result described here reflects the date it was written and may have changed since.
Corrections
We correct errors promptly and transparently. If you spot a factual error — a misstated result, a broken or wrong citation, an out-of-date regulatory status — email hello@peptidenewsnetwork.com with the article and the specifics. We will review it against the source, fix what is wrong, and note a correction where the change is material to the meaning of the piece.
Independence and funding
Peptide News Network is an independent publication operated by Biosignal Media. We are not a pharmacy, clinic, laboratory, or seller of any compound, and we do not endorse any product, vendor, or protocol. Our reporting is editorially independent of any company or product we cover, and coverage is never sold. Where we describe a company’s or regulator’s action, we are reporting it, not recommending it.
Contact
Corrections, story tips, and questions about our standards are welcome at hello@peptidenewsnetwork.com. More about who publishes the Site is on our About page.