Editorial Policy

What this policy governs

This policy covers everything published on Compare GLP: the comparison boards, the provider reviews, the research articles, and the scores attached to each company.

It is written to be held against the site. If a page here breaks one of these rules, that is a defect, and reporting it is welcome.

No clinical credential is claimed

The site claims no clinical credential for its editor and does not use a medical-review stamp. Editorial review is not a substitute for advice from your own licensed clinician.

A byline on this site describes an editorial role: reading what providers publish, verifying prices against their source, and writing the comparison. It carries no medical qualification, and none is implied by it.

Nothing published here is medical advice, a diagnosis, or a treatment recommendation. What to take, whether to take it, and at what dose are decisions for you and a prescriber who knows your history.

An FDA warning letter is disclosed and never disqualifying

A warning letter is stated plainly on the company's review. It never removes a company from the board, never lowers a score, and never costs a ranking position. That is policy, not an oversight.

The reason is what these letters usually are. The large majority concern marketing and labeling, meaning how a product was promoted or presented, rather than the contents of a vial.

A letter is not evidence that a medication is contaminated, ineffective, or dangerous, and it is not presented here as if it were.

So the practice is simple: say what the letter concerned, link the agency's own copy, and let the reader weigh it. No conclusion about a company's character is drawn from one.

How a company gets on the board

Inclusion is an editorial decision. A company appears because readers are comparing it, not because it asked to be there.

Paid partners appear before non-partners on comparison boards. Within those groups, the published sorting rules apply. A commission does not buy a higher disclosure score or remove a criticism.

A company that is a paid partner and a company that pays nothing are handled identically: same seven checks, same price verification, same pros and cons, same review.

Where the facts come from

Every figure on this site comes from a page the company publishes, and every figure carries the date it was read and a link to where it came from.

Where a company publishes nothing on a point, the page says so as a statement about that company's own disclosure. “X does not name its compounding pharmacy” is a fact about X's site, and it is checkable.

A rate quoted to us privately is not a published price. If a company's pricing has changed, the page follows the company's published page, not an email.

Independence from the companies reviewed

No provider previews, reviews, or approves a page before it goes live. None has veto over a con, a score, or a verdict.

Compare GLP has commercial relationships with some providers, identified as paid partners. These relationships are described in our Disclosure. The site does not provide clinical care.

Some outbound links can pay a commission. Placement can be commercial; the assessment is not. Disclosure sets out exactly how that works and how many companies are paid partners today.

Verdicts, and what a reader can argue with

A score is computed. A verdict is a judgment, written by a person, and a reader is entitled to disagree with it.

The two are kept apart on purpose. The score comes from seven declared checks that anyone can re-derive from a company's own site. The verdict is opinion, and it is labeled as opinion by being written in prose rather than printed as a number.

Updates and corrections

Pages are revisited because prices, state coverage, and program terms change. A substantive change is stamped with a new date.

Errors get fixed rather than quietly reworded. Corrections explains how to report one and what happens next.