Elara MD publishes the same two numbers as a sibling brand to the dollar, and is the only one of the five brands sharing its page template that attaches the word month to either of them.
What Elara MD charges
Sermorelin: $349/mo — printed as "Sermorelin Injection — Starts at $349/month". ⛔ The same number appears on Kin Meds as a bare "Starts At $349" with no period at all, and on Wellspring Longevity Clinic as "Starts at $349". Of the family, only this brand states the unit
NAD+: $249/mo — printed as "NAD+ Injection — Starts at $249/month", again with the unit stated where its template siblings omit it. A sublingual mini-troche appears in the same navigation at the same figure
Elara MD is not a paid partner; this link may earn a commission if that changes. Full disclosure.
By Nora Castellan, Standards EditorUpdated September 2026
The only brand in its family that states a unit
Both product pages print the compound, the route, and a starts-at figure with the word month attached. That is a complete price claim: a number, a unit, and a hedge that says the number can rise.
Three of the four brands running this identical template print the same numbers with no unit at all. One prints higher numbers, also with no unit.
So the template is not what removes the unit — a brand using it can state one, and this brand does. Whatever is happening on the others is a choice each of them made separately.
This site records both figures as monthly rates on that basis, and records the siblings' figures as ones with no period, which is the difference a reader most needs when comparing them.
The route is in the product name
The page titles the products by route: an injection of each compound, with a sublingual troche of the growth-hormone peptide sold separately and appearing in the navigation at its own figure.
Naming the route in the title rather than in a paragraph is a small thing that prevents a specific error. A dissolvable troche and a subcutaneous injection are not the same product, and a comparison that files both under one compound at one price averages a choice a patient makes deliberately.
The roster carries the injectable figures with the route recorded on each price row.
The catalogue also lists the antioxidant, priced in line with the coenzyme.
Its about page returns a not-found status
The path where an operating company would normally be published returns a not-found status. So does a deliberately nonsensical path on the same host, at almost exactly the same body size — twenty-one bytes apart.
Two honest not-found responses of nearly identical size is exactly the shape that makes byte counts a useless instrument. The status code is what distinguishes a page from an absence, and here both are absences.
As a result no operating company was reachable, and none is recorded. The legal pages of the brands running this template carry only an arbitration provider's name, which is not an operator.
Screened by brand against the regulator's warning-letter index, this seller returns nothing — unlike two of the brands running its template.
Identical numbers are one observation, not two
This brand and one sibling publish the same two figures to the dollar for the same two compounds under the same category labels.
A comparison that treats those as two independent data points about the market is counting one product twice. The roster carries both because they are two live businesses a reader can buy from; this review says plainly that their prices are not independent evidence.
The five brands together publish three distinct price pairs, not five. That is the number worth carrying away from this family.
No dispensing pharmacy is named, no certificate of analysis appears anywhere, and no state coverage list is published.
Who it's for
Readers comparing this five-brand family who want the one page in it that says what its number buys.
Buyers who want the route in the product name rather than in a paragraph.
Anyone who wants a sublingual alternative to an injection priced separately.
Shoppers who want a brand in this family with no enforcement letter against it.
Who should look elsewhere
Anyone who wants an operating company published, since the page where one would sit returns a not-found status.
Readers who want a price that is not identical to a sibling brand's.
Buyers who want a certificate of analysis or a named dispensing pharmacy.
Shoppers who need a state coverage list.
Strengths
The only brand in its five-brand template family that attaches a period to its figures
Names the route in the product title rather than leaving injection and troche to be inferred
Publishes a phone number in the header of every product page
Sells a sublingual troche alongside the injection and prices it separately
Trade-offs
No operating company published anywhere reachable — its about page returns a not-found status
Its arbitration clause is the same clause four sibling brands publish, which is where an entity search on this family goes wrong
Identical figures to a sibling brand, so the two together are one price observation and not two
No pharmacy named, no certificate of analysis, no state coverage list
How we verified this
Loaded both product pages with a full browser user-agent, printing the effective URL beside the requested one on each.
Ran a nonsense-path control on the host in the same run; it returned a not-found status twenty-one bytes from the not-found status returned by the about page, which is why the status code is the instrument and the size is not.
Joined the page's text nodes before matching any figure.
Recorded both figures as monthly rates because both pages attach the word month, and recorded the siblings' figures separately as having no period.
Compared this brand's two figures against the four sibling brands running the same template and counted the distinct price pairs across the family.
Declined to record an operating company, because none was reachable and the family's legal pages name only an arbitration provider.
Searched the extracted text of both product pages for certificate, purity and third-party-testing language and found none.
Screened the brand name against the regulator's warning-letter index, with a nonsense query as a control in the same run.
A provider to compare Elara MD against
Trellis Vitality
Trellis Vitality frames its program around body-composition tracking rather than scale weight, pairing NAD+, glutathione and tesamorelin with at-home biomarker panels and a 90-day re-test, and names its dispensing pharmacy, VialsRX in Houston, by address.
Yes. Both product pages attach the word month to the figure, which makes this the only brand in its template family that does.
Who operates this brand?
Not established. The page where an operating company would be published returns a not-found status, and the family's legal pages name only an arbitration provider.
Are these prices independent of other sellers here?
No. They are identical to a sibling brand's to the dollar, so the two together are one price observation and not two.
Is the sublingual form priced?
Yes, separately from the injection, and it appears in the navigation at its own figure.
Does it have a warning letter?
No. Two of the brands running its page template do; this one returns nothing when screened by brand.
Elara MD is not a paid partner; this link may earn a commission if that changes. Full disclosure.