Paying for the evaluation is the model
A physician consultation is priced and charged before anything is prescribed, and the site states that therapy is prescribed only if clinically appropriate after evaluation. It also disclaims being a click-and-ship platform in those words.
That is a defensible structure and it is stated honestly. A reader who wants a paid assessment rather than an intake form engineered to end in a prescription will find this seller unusual in the right direction.
Three prices for one programme
The GLP-1 page says programmes typically range from one figure to a higher one per month. The semaglutide page says programmes start as low as the lower of those figures per month, and then, a few paragraphs further down, says semaglutide therapy typically ranges between two numbers that sit entirely below it.
The second range does not overlap the starting figure printed above it on the same page. There is no reading under which all three statements hold. This review records the starting figure that two of the three pages agree on and writes the contradiction into the record beside it.
Nothing is scoped to a molecule
No figure anywhere on the site is attached to semaglutide or tirzepatide specifically. The numbers describe a GLP-1 programme, and the semaglutide page's own range is one of the three that disagree.
So this row carries a GLP-1 programme figure rather than a semaglutide or tirzepatide price. Filing an unscoped programme figure under a molecule would attach a number to a drug the seller never attached it to, and here the seller cannot even agree with itself about the programme.
A count instead of a list
The contact block states the number of states the practice is licensed in. A count is not a list: it tells a reader that some states are excluded without telling them which, so nobody can establish their own eligibility from it. The states field on this row is therefore empty.
The compounding pharmacy is described as a licensed US compounding pharmacy and never named. No individual prescribing clinician or medical director is identified, despite physician-led being the central claim on every page.
Bridgeside Telehealth's published pricing
| Medication | Price | Verified |
|---|---|---|
| Glp-1 (compounded) | $275/mostarting as low as, per month, across the GLP-1 programme as a whole; the site names no per-molecule price and its own pages state two further and incompatible ranges for the same programme, so this figure is filed against GLP-1 rather than against semaglutide or tirzepatide | September 2026source |
compareglp may earn a commission when a reader signs up with a provider through a link on this site. 4 of the 283 providers reviewed here are paid partners today; the other 279 are not. See how this works.
See Bridgeside Telehealth's current price →Good fit if
- Readers who want a paid physician evaluation before any medication decision.
- Patients who prefer a seller that says outright a prescription is not guaranteed.
- Anyone wary of automatic subscriptions, which this site disclaims on more than one page.
- Readers who want a single all-in figure for a peptide programme covering the consultation and the medication.
Look elsewhere if
- Anyone who needs to know what the programme costs, because the site gives three incompatible answers.
- Readers comparing semaglutide prices, since nothing here is scoped to a molecule.
- Patients who need to confirm their own state, which a published count cannot do.
- Anyone who requires the compounding pharmacy or the prescribing physician to be named.
How this review was verified
- Read the GLP-1 telehealth page, the semaglutide page and the homepage at their source URLs and logged every price statement with the date it was read.
- Recorded all three statements and confirmed that the lower range on the semaglutide page does not overlap the starting figure printed above it on the same page.
- Filed the starting figure against GLP-1 rather than against a molecule, because no figure on the site is scoped to one.
- Left the states field empty because the site publishes a count rather than a list, and a count cannot establish anyone's eligibility.
- Pulled all 3,677 rows of the FDA warning-letter table and filtered them locally with a known-positive and a nonsense-string control in the same run; no letter found.