MultiGen Wellness Review

What MultiGen Wellness charges

• Sermorelin: $62.70 — PER VIAL, not per month — read from the formulary row "Sermorelin Acetate Sterile Injection Solution 1mg/ml 6mL Vial ❄ Refrigerate $62.70"; the 1.5 mg/mL 6 mL vial is $80.85 and the oral forms are priced per 30-count pack ($90.75 troches, $107.25 rapid-dissolve tablets). $25 flat-rate overnight shipping is charged separately and stated on the same page
• Tesamorelin: $280.50 — PER VIAL — the smallest of four tesamorelin SKUs on the same table: 10 mg/mL 1 mL $280.50, 5 mg/mL 3 mL $330.00, 5 mg/mL 6 mL $577.50, 10 mg/mL 3 mL $660.00. ⛔ The four are not comparable without the strength, so this figure is the cheapest vial and not the cheapest milligram
• PT-141: $156.75 — PER VIAL — read from "PT-141 (Bremelanotide) 2mg/mL 10mL Vial ❄ Refrigerate $156.75". No dosing frequency is published beside it, so the figure cannot be converted to a month

A formulary, not a menu

The peptide page ends in a table with columns for medication, strength, package size, storage and price. Every row carries all five. That is a formulary in the pharmacy sense rather than a marketing menu, and it makes per-milligram comparison possible in a market where it usually is not.

The growth-hormone peptide alone appears in six formulations across three routes — two injectable strengths, troches, rapid-dissolve tablets and sublingual tablet triturates — each with its own figure. The visceral-fat peptide appears in four vial sizes spanning more than a twofold range.

Shipping is priced separately and stated twice, which is unusual: most sellers here either fold it in silently or leave it undiscussed.

The cards above the table are a different matter. They mix per-vial and per-month units in the same list, so the summary and the formulary are not comparable to each other. The figures recorded on this site come from the table.

It publishes its own markup

The line directly beneath the formulary states the percentage markup every price on the page reflects, over compounding cost, and adds that prescriptions are required.

No other seller reviewed on this site publishes its own margin. It is not a price, it is not a discount and it is not a claim about competitors — it is a disclosure about how the numbers above it were built.

Whether the figure is verifiable is a separate question, and this site does not treat it as verified. What is recorded is that the seller published it, which is a different and rarer kind of fact.

The same page answers the regulatory-status question compound by compound rather than with one blanket sentence, distinguishing an approved indication from off-label compounded use.

The catalogue and the prose disagree about one compound

The overnight research pass that surfaced this seller recorded a well-known tissue-repair peptide among its compounds. Re-reading the page on the date in the header, that peptide has no row in the formulary at all.

What the seller actually stocks is a newer analogue of it. The analogue's own card describes it by reference to the older peptide, its benefit list claims superior oral bioavailability against the older peptide, and the FAQ mentions the two together.

So the older peptide appears four times in the prose and zero times in the catalogue. Declaring it on this row would have put this seller onto a board it does not sell into, on the strength of a comparison sentence.

This site therefore records three compounds for this seller, all three of which have a formulary row and a price. A second compound named in the research pass has no occurrence on the page at all.

How we verified this

• Fetched the peptide page and the privacy policy with a full browser user-agent and compared the effective URL to the requested one on both.
• Fired a nonsense-path control at the host in the same run; it returned an honest not-found status.
• Joined the text nodes before matching, then read all thirty-three dollar figures in context and separated the card figures from the formulary rows.
• Counted occurrences of every compound this site tracks and checked each against the formulary table rather than against the prose.
• Confirmed that the tissue-repair peptide named in the research pass has no formulary row, by reading all four of its occurrences in full.
• Confirmed that the second compound named in the research pass has zero occurrences anywhere on the page.
• Swept every attribute on both pages for a certificate, a PDF or an analysis document; none was found.
• Screened the trading name against the regulator's live warning-letter index, with a known-positive and a nonsense control in the same run.