How we check
Trust is a chain of evidence, not a green check.
Before you spend money on a peptide, you want three answers: is it real, will I get scammed, and is this the fair price. This page shows exactly how VialGrade earns each answer — and what we refuse to guess about.
We keep the receipts
A saved, timestamped copy of what every vendor and lab actually showed — so history can't be quietly rewritten.
We don't hide what's missing
No sterility test? We say so, instead of quietly rounding it up to “trusted.” Unknown always stays visible.
A human checks the big claims
Software gathers the data. Before a scam flag, legal note, or accusation goes public, a person reviews it.
The evidence ladder
How much a lab test really proves
“Lab tested” can mean six very different things. Every listing on VialGrade says which of these six it is. Further down the list means stronger proof — it does not mean “safe”.
We found a document
A lab report or vendor page exists and we saved a copy. That's all it proves so far — anyone can post a PDF.
The lab confirms it's theirs
The laboratory named on the report confirms it really issued it. The paper is genuine — this is where a QR-verifiable COA gets you.
Tested — but the vendor picked the sample
A real sample was tested, but the vendor chose which vial went to the lab. A cherry-picked winner proves less than it looks like.
Tested from a customer's sealed unit
A customer sent in a sealed unit with documented handling. Harder to game — this is what actually shipped.
Tested from a blind purchase
Someone independent bought the product like any customer would and sent it for testing. The vendor never saw it coming.
Tested repeatedly, from separate sources
Multiple units of the same batch, bought separately, came back consistent. The strongest evidence we track.
Reading a lab report
One report answers six separate questions
A polished-looking COA can still dodge most of these. On every listing, VialGrade answers each one separately — established, partial, or unknown.
Is the report real?
Was it genuinely issued by the lab whose name is on it?
Is it for this batch?
Does the report's batch number match the batch actually being sold?
Is it the right compound?
Did the tested sample match what the label claims it is?
Is the dose really there?
Was the amount measured independently, or just printed on the label?
Who picked the sample?
A vendor-picked sample and a blind purchase are very different proof.
Is it clean?
Were sterility, endotoxin, or particulates separately checked? Usually they weren't — we say so.
Limitations by design
What we refuse to imply
No single safety score
Identity, dose, purity, sterility, and legality are different questions. One number would hide whichever answer is missing.
A real COA isn't a guarantee
A genuine report proves the document is genuine. It can't prove the vial in your hand matches the tested sample.
No legal shortcuts
Regulatory information is dated, jurisdiction-specific, and reviewed before it's published.
No anonymous accusations
A scam flag needs a visible evidence trail, a confidence level, and a way for the accused to dispute it.
Governance
Software proposes. People publish.
Automation does the repetitive collecting and comparing. It never controls money, permissions, legal conclusions, or what gets published about a vendor.
Nothing is rewritten
Every published change keeps the original snapshot and timestamp behind it.
Structured before reviewed
Extracted claims must fit typed fields before they can even enter review.
High-impact claims wait for a person
Scam flags, legal events, and adverse findings require deterministic rules or human approval.
Go deeper
The full records, if you want them
Batch test records
The complete test record for a specific batch — including results that disagree.
Lab reports
Every report we've located, what it establishes, and what it doesn't.
Independent testing
Blind-purchase and sealed-sample programs, and why sample origin matters.
Laboratories
Who runs the tests, their methods, and their report history.