What I grade, and what I don't
I grade words, not vials. I read everything a supplier puts in public: blog posts, dosing and mixing guides, product pages, the FAQ, the returns and privacy pages, and their lab report pages. That's what a buyer reads before they pay, so that's what I mark.
I don't test what's in anyone's vials, I don't buy from them for a review, and I never guess about purity or quality. If I haven't seen it, it isn't in the grade. A good grade means a shop explains things honestly. It doesn't mean their product is safe for you to use.
The five questions: the score out of 10
Each question gets 0, 1 or 2 points. I read the shop's content as a whole, then mark each one.
| Question | 2 points | 1 point | 0 points |
|---|---|---|---|
| Is it clear? | Plain words, well organised, nothing contradicts itself. | Mostly clear, with some confusing or conflicting bits. | Hard to follow, or says opposite things on different pages. |
| Is it useful? | Helps you understand, even if you never buy. | Some real help, but mostly there to sell. | Sales copy dressed up as information. |
| Are the facts right? | Everything I checked matches the trials and the official labels. | Mostly right, with a few errors. | Errors that could mislead someone about something that matters. |
| Does it show the evidence? | Names the trials, links the sources, gives the numbers. | Some sources, but big claims left unsupported. | No sources at all. |
| Is it honest about downsides? | Side effects, limits, what isn't known, and what isn't approved. | Mentions downsides, but briefly or buried. | Nothing about side effects or limits. |
The three supplier checks
These sit next to the score, not inside it, because they're about how the shop behaves rather than how well it writes.
| Check | Green | Amber | Red |
|---|---|---|---|
| Lab reports | A current report for the batch on sale, from a named lab, with a link or code you can check on the lab's own site. | Real reports, but old, incomplete, mislabelled, or not for the batch you're buying. | No reports, or reports I can't verify anywhere. |
| Claims & dosing | No treatment claims and no dose plans on research-use products. | Borderline wording, like “benefits” next to a research-use label. | Says a product treats a disease, or gives dose plans for people, on products sold as research use only. |
| Basics | A real address, phone, company details, clear returns and privacy policies, a research-use notice. | Some of these missing or inconsistent. | Most of them missing. |
Warnings. If a red check could put someone at real risk, I add a warning line under the grade, in red, saying why. You'll see it before you read a word of the review.
What the number means
| Score | In plain English |
|---|---|
| 9 to 10 | Clear, sourced and honest about the downsides. I'd point a friend at it to learn. |
| 7 to 8 | Good, with gaps. Worth reading, check the gaps elsewhere. |
| 4 to 6 | Some real help, but missing evidence or downsides. Don't rely on it alone. |
| 0 to 3 | Wrong, unsourced or one-sided enough that it could mislead you. |
How I collect the evidence
- Every point in a review has the exact quote, a link to the page, and the date I saw it.
- I save a screenshot or a copy of each page, because shops edit their sites. Each one gets a reference number (E1, E2 and so on) in the review's evidence log.
- I check facts against primary sources: published trials, official drug labels, and health bodies like the CDC. Those are listed at the bottom of every review.
- Where a shop links a lab report, I open the lab's own verify page and compare the numbers.
- I quote their words, but I never repeat their doses. Dosing advice from a shop isn't something I'll pass on, even to criticise it.
- Links to the shops I review are marked nofollow, so a review never boosts them in search.
Their side
Any supplier I grade can reply at any time through the form below. I add their reply to the review word for word, and say what changed because of it, if anything. If a supplier asks to be left out of the review entirely, I respect that and don't mention them beyond what they publish.
When a grade changes
Only two things change a grade:
- I got a fact wrong. I fix it, write what was wrong and when in the review's update log, and leave the old wording visible.
- The supplier fixed what they publish. I grade it again in public, with a before and after at the top, and keep the original review underneath.
A grade never changes because a supplier complains, asks nicely, or threatens. Corrections go out everywhere the review went out: the page, and any post I shared it in.
What nobody can buy
Nobody can pay for a grade, a better grade, a faster re-grade or a removal. There are no affiliate links in reviews.
Who's behind Carl
Carl is run by the team behind JP Supplements, a South African research peptide supplier. That's exactly why JP went first, graded on these same rules, in public. It got a 6 out of 10, fixed its article, and earned a 9. Read JP's review. JP keeps getting graded the same way as everyone else.
Spotted a mistake, or you're a supplier I graded?
Tell me the page, the line and your source. I fix facts fast and say what changed. Suppliers can reply to their review here too, and I'll add your reply to the review word for word.
Update log
- 14 Oct 2026: First published.
