About GLP Research Hub
An independent aggregator for GLP-1 and research-peptide communities. 38 communities, 3,329 submissions, no shop, no accounts, no advice.
last revised 21 Jul 2026
What this is
GLP Research Hub is a community of communities. Instead of one big forum, there are 38 topic communities written c/<name>, each with its own rules, moderators, flair set and evidence standard. Submissions get voted on. Comments nest. The front page is a mixed feed of the best of everything, and there are five different ways to sort it because "best" genuinely means five different things.
It started in August 2023 as about forty people and a wiki stub, mostly to answer one question — how do you tell whether a vial contains what the label says — and grew outward from there into dosing, side effects, bloodwork, cold chain, customs, insurance and the four independent testing services everybody eventually pays for.
The one norm that matters
Claims need evidence. Clinical claims want a published trial with a journal and a year. Vendor claims want an independent test on the vial you actually received. Everything else is allowed as long as it is labelled as an opinion.
How the ranking works
Published, because a ranking you cannot inspect is just a preference.
| Sort | Formula | What it surfaces |
|---|---|---|
| Hot | log10(max(|score|,1)) + sign × seconds/45000 | Things with momentum. Age decays hard. |
| New | timestamp, descending | Everything, unranked. Twenty minutes old and occasionally wrong. |
| Top | raw score inside a time window | What the most people agreed with. |
| Rising | score ÷ (age hours + 2)^1.35 | Punching above its age. |
| Controversial | (up + down) ^ (min/max) | Real disagreements. Magnitude × balance, so 500/480 beats 9/9. |
Note what is missing: there is no personalisation, no engagement optimisation and no editorial thumb. The formulas above are the whole system, and Top with a time filter is usually the one you actually want.
Vendor source pages
The vendor directory holds 20 pages that are deliberately not called reviews. A source page is a record: a dated verification log, every independent test a member has paid for and published, shipping-lane reports, and member reviews with the unflattering ones left in.
Three rules govern them. A storefront is linked from each source page, marked nofollow and sponsored, so you can read the vendor account against ours — we take nothing from any of them. A vendor-supplied certificate is never sufficient evidence on its own. And log entries are never quietly deleted — including the accusations that turned out to be wrong, which are annotated and kept, because a record you can edit silently is not a record.
Our ratings are our own. Other independent communities covering the same suppliers land within a few tenths of us, and where we diverge it is normally because one group weights logistics and another weights purity consistency. That divergence is a feature; identical scores across supposedly independent groups would be the suspicious outcome.
How this is funded
Sponsor units, labelled as sponsored, plus one storefront link on each vendor source page, marked nofollow and sponsored. Nothing else leaves the site. Currently: Janoshik Analytical and PeptideMeter (independent testing), Sigma-Aldrich (reference standards), and GL Biochem (Shanghai), which is a manufacturer and appears paired with the Janoshik placements.
What sponsorship does not buy: a rating, a directory position, a moderation outcome, or removal of a bad test result. GL Biochem has a source page in the directory like everyone else and its entries are written by the same volunteers.
Why it is read-only
What you are reading is a static archive of the site. No accounts, no logins, no posting, and the vote arrows are decorative. We publish it this way because it is fast, it cannot leak anything, it costs almost nothing to keep online, and it means a three-year-old thread will still be there and still be readable in another three years.
Practically: everything works without JavaScript except the theme toggle, the comment collapse controls, the comment re-sort and the search page. Those four are progressive enhancements over pages that are already complete.
Who runs it
Volunteers. The admins and moderators listed on each community are unpaid, unaffiliated members who also post normally. None of them is your clinician, none of them works for a vendor, and the ones who sound most authoritative are not exempt from being asked for a source.
What this is not
- Not a pharmacy, vendor, compounder, laboratory or clinical service.
- Not a source of medical advice. See the disclaimer.
- Not a marketplace. There is nothing to buy here and nobody to buy it from.
- Not a place to get a dose recommendation. Every community removes those.
- Not anonymous-friendly in the way people hope — we remove contact handles, wallet addresses and tracking numbers because they identify people.
The site in numbers
| Thing | Count |
|---|---|
| Communities | 38 |
| Community wikis | 21 |
| Submissions | 3,329 |
| Comments | 107,208 |
| Members across communities | 1,909,700 |
| Vendor source pages | 20 |
| Topic pages | 232 |