Corrections and Update Log

Affected: Pages describing the LillyDirect 45-day refill window

What we said: We published that missing the 45-day refill window raises 12.5 mg to $849 a month and 15 mg to $1,049.

What it now says: LillyDirect's own product page states the regular prices are $499 for 7.5 mg and $699 each for 10 mg, 12.5 mg and 15 mg. Corrected to the manufacturer's figures.

Why it was wrong: The $849 and $1,049 figures came from a third-party page. We had by then already withdrawn eleven provider figures for exactly this reason and still had not checked our own brand anchor against the manufacturer.

Source: https://www.lilly.com/lillydirect/medicines/zepbound EV-2702

Affected: Every page carrying a Henry Meds monthly figure

What we said: We published Henry Meds compounded tirzepatide at $179 a month, described as a reported flat all-inclusive rate. Four publications report that figure.

What it now says: Withdrawn. A source that examined the pricing states the $179 headline applies to liraglutide or a 12-month prepay rather than injectable tirzepatide, and that dose escalation adds about $100 a month per tier. Other sources give $199, about $297 introductory rising to $429-$549 at maintenance, and $1,047 for a three-month oral supply.

Why it was wrong: COR-008 withdrew ten figures we had taken from competitor pages. Henry Meds was not among them, because four publications agreed on $179 and agreement felt like confirmation. It is not. Four publications repeating one number is one source, not four.

Source: https://healthymealsincentives.org/henry-meds-reviews/ EV-2401

Affected: Every ranking, comparison and cheapest page carrying a monthly figure for ten providers

What we said: We published monthly figures for Embody, SkinnyRx, Yucca Health, Lavender Sky Health, Fifty 410, OrderlyMeds, Trimi, TMates, Gala GLP-1 and Oak Longevity, taken from competitor comparison pages, and labelled them provider-reported. We described Embody's $99 as a flat rate.

What it now says: Every one of those figures has been withdrawn. They were third-party claims we never confirmed at the provider's own site. The Embody figure was wrong on both counts: six sources give six different tirzepatide prices between $119 and $299, several state the low rate is promotional and rises to $299 after month one, and the $99 appears to be a semaglutide rate. A new evidence state, third-party claim, now exists and such figures cannot be ranked, summed or compared.

Why it was wrong: Our evidence policy exists to stop exactly this. We criticised other publications for quoting prices without their term, dose and formulation, and then republished their figures without checking any of the three. A reported status in our model means the provider reported it. We applied it to figures no provider had reported to anyone.

Source: https://www.glp1clinics.org/telehealth-providers/embody EV-2301

Affected: Not our error. Recorded because we published the query and owe readers the resolution.

What we said: On 26 July 2026 we published an open query about a figure on NexLife (opens nexlife.us in a new tab)'s own page stating that SURMOUNT-1 participants lost up to 24.3% of body weight, and logged it at status pending because we could not establish which analysis produced it.

What it now says: Resolved. No published SURMOUNT-1 analysis reports 24.3%. Lilly's own announcement states up to 22.5% for the efficacy estimand at 15 mg. The only 24.3 in the SURMOUNT-1 literature is a median time to weight plateau of 24.3 weeks. We have asked NexLife (opens nexlife.us in a new tab) to correct the figure.

Why it was wrong: We publish our open queries, so we publish their resolution, including when the answer is inconvenient for the provider we feature. A query left permanently open is a smear; a query resolved is a check.

Source: https://www.stocktitan.net/news/LLY/lilly-s-tirzepatide-delivered-up-to-22-5-weight-loss-in-adults-with-26h3ifcirjbn.html EV-2003

Affected: Every page emitting a reviewedBy credit, and the medical reviewers page

What we said: We recorded Jonathan Michael Snipes MD (NPI 1821250077) and Kim Callender FNP-BC as this publication's named medical reviewers, and emitted a reviewedBy credit naming Dr Snipes in the structured data of 526 pages.

What it now says: Both individuals are named on RxPepsDirect's own published pages as its medical director and prescribers, and as the medical reviewers of its competing comparison of compounded tirzepatide telehealth services — a comparison in which RxPepsDirect ranks itself cheapest. RxPepsDirect sells the category this publication reviews. The reviewer credit has been suspended sitewide and the reviewedBy structured data removed pending resolution.

Why it was wrong: Our conflicts policy states that no clinician reviews a page about a company they work for, consult to or hold an interest in. We recorded two NPIs and never checked what those clinicians do elsewhere. That is the check the policy exists to require, and we did not run it.

Source: https://www.rxpepsdirect.com/learn/best-compounded-tirzepatide-telehealth EV-1601

Affected: All peptide pages referencing the FDA compounding advisory committee

What we said: We wrote that briefing documents posted 30 June 2026 recommended against adding BPC-157, TB-500 and five further peptides to the 503A list, and that the regulatory direction was toward closing the compounding route.

What it now says: FDA staff reviewers did recommend against all seven. On 23 July 2026 the advisory committee voted the other way — 8-6 with one abstention in favour of BPC-157, KPV and TB-500, and 7-5 with two abstentions for MOTS-c — overriding its own agency's scientists. The votes are non-binding and the FDA decides through formal rulemaking, which commonly takes 8 to 12 months.

Why it was wrong: We published the staff recommendation as though it predicted the committee outcome. It did not. The direction of travel reversed within two days of publication, and describing a live regulatory process by its most recent document is a mistake we should not repeat.

Source: FDA Pharmacy Compounding Advisory Committee, 23 July 2026 EV-1301

Affected: All pages describing the tirzepatide shortage timeline

What we said: We wrote that the tirzepatide shortage was declared resolved in October 2024, as a single settled event.

What it now says: FDA determined the shortage resolved on 2 October 2024. On 22 October 2024 that decision was remanded to the agency for reevaluation as part of litigation. On 5 March 2025 a district court denied the plaintiffs' preliminary injunction in Outsourcing Facilities Association v. FDA. Some sources date the resolution to December 2024 for that reason.

Why it was wrong: We compressed a contested twelve-month sequence into one date. The litigation is material context for anyone assessing how settled the current regulatory position is.

Source: FDA drug shortage record EV-0805

Affected: All pages showing a tirzepatide titration schedule

What we said: We published a fixed week-by-week escalation calendar: 2.5 mg for weeks 1–4, 5 mg for weeks 5–8, 7.5 mg for weeks 9–12, and so on through 15 mg by week 21.

What it now says: The Zepbound label directs 2.5 mg once weekly for 4 weeks, an increase to 5 mg, then increases in 2.5 mg increments no sooner than every 4 weeks based on tolerability and response, to a maximum of 15 mg. It names 5, 10 and 15 mg as the recommended maintenance dosages; 7.5 and 12.5 mg are titration steps.

Why it was wrong: We had taken the schedule from a secondary summary rather than the label. Presenting a minimum interval as a calendar implies escalation is automatic. On a page about dosing, that is the wrong impression to leave.

Source: ZEPBOUND US Prescribing Information EV-0701

Affected: All pharmacy verification pages referencing 503B facilities

What we said: We wrote that 503B outsourcing facilities must comply with CGMP, in a context implying that registration demonstrated compliance.

What it now says: CGMP compliance is a legal requirement under section 503B. FDA states separately that registration means only that the agency received the required information — it does not mean the facility is making FDA-approved drugs, and it does not mean it is in compliance with CGMP.

Why it was wrong: Our wording let a legal requirement carry the weight of a verified fact. The useful question is whether a facility has been inspected and what the inspection found.

Source: FDA — Questions and Answers: Outsourcing Facility Registration EV-0601

Affected: All pages comparing the $149 FDA-approved oral options against compounded programmes

What we said: We reported that the cheapest FDA-approved GLP-1 is now $149 a month and undercuts most of the compounded market, without stating the efficacy of the products being compared.

What it now says: The same pages now carry the efficacy ladder. Orforglipron reported approximately 11–12.4% mean reduction in ATTAIN-1 and oral semaglutide 13.6–16.6% in OASIS 4, against about 20.9% for tirzepatide 15 mg in SURMOUNT-1. Both $149 options are the least effective approved products.

Why it was wrong: The price statement was accurate and the comparison was incomplete. Comparing a roughly 12% drug with a roughly 21% drug on price alone is the error this publication exists to catch.

Source: ATTAIN-1, OASIS 4 and SURMOUNT-1 EV-0113

Tirzepatide Ranked. “Corrections and Update Log.” S.J Partners LLC, 2026-07-26. https://tirzepatideranked.com/corrections/

When quoting a figure, include the capture date shown beside it rather than the date you read this page. A price without its capture date is not a usable citation.