Harbor publishes a flat rate per compound and promises in writing that it does not rise as the dose does. Its terms then decline, in equally plain writing, to say whether the service reaches the reader at all.
What Harbor charges
Sermorelin: $99/mo — a flat monthly programme rate, read in the seller's own pricing block as "Sermorelin program | Most chosen | $99 /mo | Flat monthly price — no increases as your dose changes | Medication, clinician care, and check-ins in one price"; the same figure appears in the page banner as "Start today for $99/mo" and in the footer product list
NAD+: $99/mo — a flat monthly programme rate, read as "NAD+ program | Most chosen | $99 /mo | Flat monthly price — no increases as your dose changes"; ⛔ the page also advertises "Save up to $600 on multi-month prepaid plans vs monthly" without publishing any prepaid rung, so the discounted price is asserted and never shown
Glutathione: $89/mo — a flat monthly programme rate, read as "Glutathione program | Most chosen | $89 /mo | Flat monthly price — no increases as your dose changes"; the cross-sell blocks on the sibling compound pages repeat the same figure, so all three longevity pages agree with one another
Harbor is not a paid partner; this link may earn a commission if that changes. Full disclosure.
By Nora Castellan, Standards EditorUpdated September 2026
A flat rate with the promise attached
Each of the three longevity pages carries one figure and a sentence directly beneath it saying the price does not increase as the dose changes. On a market where titration is the usual mechanism for a bill going up, that sentence is the product.
The same line names what the figure covers — medication, clinician care and check-ins — rather than leaving a reader to discover a separate consultation charge later.
The three figures also agree with each other across pages: each product page cross-sells its siblings and repeats their rates, and the footer carries all of them again. Nothing on this site contradicts anything else on it.
That internal consistency is rarer than it sounds and it is the reason these three rows could be recorded without a conflict note.
The saving that is asserted and never shown
Every longevity page advertises a substantial saving on multi-month prepaid plans compared with paying monthly. It is presented as a headline number in its own block.
No prepaid rung appears anywhere on the page. There is no three-month figure, no six-month figure, and no total. The saving is a claim about prices the site does not publish.
This site records only the flat monthly rate, and notes the unshown discount on the row, because a figure that cannot be checked against a published price is not a price.
A reader who wants that discount has to reach an intake to find out what it costs, which is the opposite of what the rest of the page is doing.
Named companies, unnamed pharmacy, no coverage
The terms open by naming the operating company, its state of incorporation and its registered address. A product-page footer separately names the partner medical group that provides consultations. Both are more than most sellers disclose.
The pharmacy is not among them. The terms say the company is not a pharmacy and does not dispense, and that a prescription may be routed to a third-party pharmacy within a network. The network is not named and neither is any pharmacy in it.
On coverage the terms are explicit in the other direction: access may be limited by state licensure and the company makes no representation that the service is available in every state. This record therefore carries no states at all.
The product pages advertise review by a clinician licensed in the reader's state. That is a fact about the prescriber, not a promise about availability, and the two are constantly conflated on this market.
Who it's for
Readers who want a rate that provably does not climb with the dose.
Buyers who want to know which legal entity operates the platform and which one employs the prescriber.
Anyone comparing three longevity compounds priced consistently across every page of one site.
Shoppers who value a seller stating plainly that it is not a pharmacy.
Who should look elsewhere
Anyone who needs to know before intake whether the service reaches their state.
Buyers who want the prepaid plan prices published rather than the saving asserted.
Readers who need the dispensing pharmacy named.
Anyone who needs lab work inside the programme rate.
Strengths
Prints one flat figure per compound with an explicit promise that it does not rise as the dose is titrated
States what the figure covers — medication, clinician care and check-ins — on the same line as the figure
Names its operating company, its state of incorporation and its registered address in the first paragraph of its terms
Names the partner medical group that provides consultations, separately from the platform company
Says plainly that it is not a pharmacy and does not dispense, rather than implying it fills its own prescriptions
Trade-offs
The terms decline to say where the service is available, so no state coverage can be recorded at all
Advertises a large saving on multi-month prepaid plans without publishing a single prepaid rung to check it against
No dispensing pharmacy is named — prescriptions go to an unnamed pharmacy "within a pharmacy network"
The claim that a prescriber is licensed in your state is a fact about the prescriber and reads, in context, like a coverage promise the terms explicitly refuse to make
No lab work is included in or priced beside the programme rate
How we verified this
Rendered every page in a real browser and read only laid-out, visible text nodes.
Fired two nonsense paths at the host in the same session before the real pages; both returned an honest not-found response.
Compared the requested address against the arrived-at address on every fetch and confirmed they matched.
Cross-checked each compound figure against the cross-sell blocks on its two sibling pages and against the site footer, and confirmed all four printings agree.
Searched the pages for any published prepaid rung to support the advertised multi-month saving, and found none.
Read the availability clause in the terms rather than the licensure claim on the product page, and recorded no coverage because the terms refuse to make one.
Screened the operating company, the brand and the named partner medical group against the regulator's live warning-letter index, with a known-positive query and a nonsense query in the same run, and confirmed every returned row named an unrelated company.
A provider to compare Harbor 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.