Choosing a Peptide Supplier & the Enforcement Record

Published August 21, 2026 · Artemis Labs

Research Buyer FAQ › Choosing a Peptide Supplier & the Enforcement Record

Several large research-peptide vendors closed between 2024 and 2026, and the FDA sent warning letters to eleven named sellers. This page is the dated record and the checks that follow from it: how to verify a supplier, what the common scams look like, and what happened to the vendors people still search for.

How this page was built. Every date, name and legal characterization below traces to the agency or court record, or to named reporting. Legal outcomes are described as the record describes them. Sources are listed under References.

How do I know if a peptide company is legit?

You check documents, not marketing — and the useful checks are all things you can do before you spend anything. Ask who tests the material and whether that lab is independent of the seller. Ask whether a lot-specific Certificate of Analysis comes with the order or only exists as a sample on a product page. Look at whether product claims carry citations you can follow.

Then look at what else is in the cart. In its March 31, 2026 letters the FDA cited administration supplies offered alongside research products. That was part of the evidence that the products were intended as drugs for human use. A research supplier has no reason to sell them. The long-form version of these checks is the peptide supplier evaluation checklist.

What happened to Peptide Sciences?

Peptide Sciences announced its closure on March 6, 2026, halted all order processing, and took its site offline shortly after. It was the largest US research-peptide vendor at the time. The company gave no detailed explanation. Its closure notice stated that any further sales under its brand are fraudulent. The dated account is in our write-up of the Peptide Sciences shutdown of March 6, 2026.

Are research peptides legal?

Research-use-only peptides are not approved drugs, and the enforcement record is about how they are marketed rather than about the molecules themselves. That distinction is the whole story. In the December 10, 2024 letters the FDA named four sellers. Each marketed products as research use only. In the agency’s account, evidence on their own websites and social accounts showed intended human use.

The March 31, 2026 batch went further. FDA’s letters state that a research-use-only disclaimer did not settle the question. In the agency’s words, “evidence obtained from your website establishes that your products are intended to be drugs for human use.” Two things drew the focus. One was therapeutic-outcome claims. The other was administration supplies offered in the same cart.

We describe the regulatory record here. We do not advise anyone on what they may lawfully do. The framework is set out in research-use-only status and FDA regulation.

What does “research use only” actually mean?

It means the material is supplied for laboratory research and is not an approved drug. The label describes intended use. It is not a quality grade, not a certification, and — as the 2024 and 2026 warning letters make clear — not a shield. FDA’s letters state that a disclaimer does not settle the question when other evidence on the same site points the other way. The regulatory background is in research-use-only status and FDA regulation.

What should I look for in a peptide supplier?

Six things. Each one can be checked from public information, or from a single order.

  1. Third-party testing — HPLC for purity, mass spectrometry for identity.
  2. A lot-specific Certificate of Analysis with every order, not a sample on a web page.
  3. Claims that carry citations you can follow.
  4. Honest disclosure of findings that cut against a compound’s popularity.
  5. No administration supplies sold.
  6. Published policies you can read before you buy.

The worked version, with examples, is the peptide supplier evaluation checklist.

Which peptide vendors shut down, and who is left?

Four large names came off the board between 2024 and 2026. Paradigm Peptides’ site went down in March 2024. FDA agents searched the Amino Asylum facility around June 18, 2025. Peptide Sciences announced its closure on March 6, 2026. Alongside those, the FDA has issued more than one hundred warning letters to peptide and research-use-only sellers since September 2025. The full chronology, with dates and sources, is our dated record of 2025–2026 vendor closures.

Why did the FDA send warning letters to peptide companies?

Because, in the agency’s account, the sellers’ own websites showed the products were intended as drugs for people. The March 31, 2026 batch named seven sites and was posted on April 7, 2026. Two evidence categories run through it: descriptions of therapeutic outcomes, and administration supplies offered in the same shopping cart. FDA’s letters also describe coded product names as circumvention rather than cover. The batch is broken down letter by letter in the April 2026 FDA warning-letter batch.

What are the most common peptide scams?

Four patterns account for most of them, and all four became more common after the 2026 closures. The first is the reused document: one Certificate of Analysis, or one chromatogram, presented for every product in a catalog. The second is the missing lot — a vial with no batch marking, which cannot be matched to any report.

The third is the lookalike site. Peptide Sciences stated in its closure notice that any further sales under its brand are fraudulent. Unaffiliated sites reusing the branding have appeared since. A similarly-named domain also appeared after Paradigm Peptides went down, claiming no affiliation with the original company. The fourth is coded product naming, which the FDA’s March 2026 letters describe as circumvention. Taken together they change the buyer’s first question from “is this vendor good” to “is this vendor real.”

Is that Peptide Sciences site still real?

No. Peptide Sciences stated in its own closure notice that any further sales under its brand are fraudulent. So a site trading under that name today is, by the company’s own statement, not the company. Unaffiliated sites reusing the branding have appeared since March 2026. The identification patterns are set out in our write-up of unaffiliated sites reusing Peptide Sciences branding.

Is Amino Asylum ever coming back?

There is nothing in the verified record either way. What is documented is the event. FDA agents searched the company’s warehouse facility around June 18, 2025. It was the first physical enforcement action against a major vendor in this market. The site went dark overnight, payment processing was terminated, and pending orders were frozen. Beyond that, the founders’ legal outcomes are not established in the public record we can verify, and we do not speculate about them. The dated account is our June 2025 Amino Asylum raid timeline.

What happened with Paradigm Peptides?

The company’s site went down in March 2024, and the criminal case concluded afterwards. Matthew Kawa, the owner, pleaded guilty on two counts. One was introducing unapproved drugs into interstate commerce with intent to defraud and mislead. The other was illegally importing merchandise. Jennifer Stechkober also pleaded guilty. Both pleas were entered on December 10, 2025.

Sentencing followed on July 30, 2026 in South Bend, Indiana. Kawa received 70 months, one year of supervised release, and a $5 million forfeiture. Stechkober received 16 months. The court record states that products labelled as SARMs contained testosterone, a Schedule III substance. The full case record is in the Paradigm Peptides case record.

What do I do if I got a fake peptide?

Stop using the material for any work, and keep everything — the vial, the label, the packaging and the paperwork. Then do the comparison that establishes what you have. Does the lot code on the vial match the lot code on the Certificate of Analysis? Does that COA name a lab, a method and a test date?

Ask the vendor directly for the batch report and the name of the testing lab. A vendor who cannot produce either has answered you. If you paid by card or through a payment app, open a dispute with that provider while the window is still open. Problems with a product can also be reported to the FDA through its report a problem channel.

What is the difference between a peptide company and a compounding pharmacy?

A compounding pharmacy is a licensed pharmacy operating under state and federal pharmacy law, dispensing to a named patient. A research-peptide company is a chemical supplier selling research-use-only material to laboratories. They are governed by different rules, hold different licences, and answer to different regulators.

The distinction matters because the FDA’s warning letters turn on it. In the agency’s account, what moved those sellers across the line was not the molecules. It was the evidence that the material was being marketed for people. Artemis Labs is a research supplier. We are not a pharmacy, not a clinic, and not anyone’s doctor.

Do you test every lot, or just some of them?

Every order ships with a Certificate of Analysis for the lot it contains. That is what per-lot testing looks like from the buyer’s side. Here is the honest limit alongside that. Artemis Labs does not yet publish chromatograms for every lot on the site. There is no public page today where you can look a lot code up. Both are planned. Until they exist, the COA in the box is the artifact, and this answer is a claim rather than something you can check for yourself.

Do you sell to clinics or med spas?

No. Artemis Labs sells research-use-only material through a public catalog and operates no wholesale, clinic or med-spa supply channel. That is a deliberate decision rather than a capacity limit. Supplying practices that give material to people is the fact pattern the FDA’s letters describe. It is not a business we are in.

This page is one section of the full Artemis Labs research-buyer FAQ. Everything in the Artemis Labs catalog is supplied for laboratory research use only.

References

  1. US FDA — Warning Letters database, including the December 10, 2024 batch (Summit Research Peptides 695607-12102024; Prime Vitality Inc dba Prime Peptides 695156-12102024; Xcel Research LLC 694608-12102024; SwissChems) and the March 31, 2026 batch posted April 7, 2026 (Lovega LLC dba Pink Pony Peptides 721088; Mile High Compounds LLC 721600; Prime Sciences 721805; Gram Peptides 721806; PekCura Labs 721709; FormPour 722215; Guangzhou Huli Technology dba Fantasy Face 722228). fda.gov/inspections-compliance-enforcement-and-criminal-investigations/warning-letters
  2. CBS News — “Peptides seller sentenced to prison for selling unapproved drugs” (Paradigm Peptides; pleas December 10, 2025; sentencing July 30, 2026, N.D. Indiana). cbsnews.com
  3. US FDA — Report a Problem to FDA. fda.gov/safety/report-problem-fda