Four terms, and the division holds on all of them
Each product page runs a selector with one, three, six and twelve-month options, each carrying a prepaid total and a per-month equivalent. Every equivalent divides correctly from the total beside it, on both drugs.
The spread across the four terms is wide, and the cheapest per-month figure requires paying a year in one charge. The selector makes that trade explicit rather than hiding the term behind a headline.
The page also publishes a financing example with the instalment count and the instalment amount stated, which is a specific claim rather than a general offer of flexibility.
A fifth price, lower than all four
The about page advertises a monthly starting figure for semaglutide that is below every option the product selector offers, including the twelve-month prepaid rate. Nothing reconciles the two, and the about page does not name a term.
So the seller's cheapest published figure is not available anywhere in its own purchase flow as published. A reader who arrives at the about page first will carry the wrong number into the comparison.
That same about page carries a comparison table of rival sellers' first-month and next-month costs. Those are not this seller's prices and none of them is recorded here.
The only company named is the web vendor
The Terms and Conditions carry a copyright line naming a practice-website platform, dated four years before this reading. That is the vendor that built the site, not the operator of the medical group.
No entity carrying the LaSara name appears on the terms page. A brand with the words Medical Group in it and no published legal entity is a specific kind of gap, because a medical group is a licensed thing.
No compounding pharmacy is named, no individual clinician is named, and no service area is published.
LaSara Medical Group's published pricing
| Medication | Price | Verified |
|---|---|---|
| Semaglutide (compounded) | $299/mothe one-month term; the selector also prices three months at $849 ($283 a month), six months at $1,495 ($249 a month) and twelve months at $2,795 ($233 a month), and every per-month figure the seller prints divides correctly from its own total | September 2026source |
| Tirzepatide (compounded) | $399/mothe one-month term; three months $1,100 ($367 a month), six months $1,995 ($333 a month) and twelve months $3,895 ($325 a month), all of which also divide correctly | September 2026source |
compareglp may earn a commission when a reader signs up with a provider through a link on this site. 4 of the 158 providers reviewed here are paid partners today; the other 154 are not. See how this works.
See LaSara Medical Group's current price →Good fit if
- Buyers who want four plan terms priced with the prepaid totals and per-month figures both shown.
- Readers who check a seller's per-month arithmetic; all eight divisions here hold.
- People considering financing who want an instalment example stated.
Look elsewhere if
- Anyone who needs the cheapest advertised figure to be purchasable; it is not in the selector.
- Readers who want to know which company operates the practice.
- Buyers who will read a comparison table quickly; most of its figures are rivals'.
- People who need a published service area or a named pharmacy.
How this review was verified
- Read both product pages and the about page and the Terms on 6 September 2026, with a nonsense-path control on the host in the same run.
- Divided each prepaid total by its term and compared the result against the seller's own per-month figure; all eight hold.
- Identified which column of the about page's comparison table belongs to this seller before recording anything, and recorded none of the rival figures.
- Read the terms page for an operating entity and found only the website platform vendor, in a four-year-old copyright line.
- Screened the operating entity and the brand name against FDA's live warning-letter datatable, carrying a known letter as a positive control and a nonsense string as a negative control in the same pass; the positive control returned its letter and the negative returned nothing. Neither the entity nor the brand returned one. Untitled letters are published separately and were not searched, so the supportable claim is that no warning letter was found.