Nip & Tuck publishes a figure against eight separate compounds on one page, which is rare on this roster, and prints two different sermorelin prices on that same page.
What Nip & Tuck Wellness Institute charges
Tesamorelin: $335 — printed as 'Tesamorelin $335+' in a table headed Monthly. ⛔ Recorded as not-monthly because the figure is a floor marked with a plus sign rather than a rate: the same page states its peptide pricing 'ranges from $150 to $900+ per month depending on the protocol and level of clinical oversight'
Sermorelin: $360 — ⛔ TWO FIGURES, ONE PAGE, BOTH PUBLISHED TODAY: one table prints 'Sermorelin: $360 Monthly' and a branded table lower on the same page prints 'The Growth Signal Sermorelin $249+'. The higher figure is recorded and the conflict is stated rather than resolved
BPC-157: $335 — printed as 'BPC-157 (The Repair Shot) - Starting at $335+'. The same page prices an oral BPC-157 separately and lower, and prices a four-peptide recovery stack containing BPC-157 higher again; none of the three is averaged here
GHK-Cu: $335 — printed as 'GHK-Cu (The Glow Protocol) - Starting at $335+', a floor rather than a rate; a two-peptide stack pairing GHK-Cu with epithalon is priced higher on the same page
MOTS-C: $335 — printed as 'The Powerhouse MOTS-C $335' in a table headed Monthly, against a stated whole-menu range of 150 to 900-plus per month
Epitalon: $335 — printed as 'The Longevity Code Epithalon $335'; a stack pairing epithalon with GHK-Cu is priced higher on the same page
PT-141: $335 — printed as 'PT-141 (The Spark Shot) - Starting at $335+', a floor rather than a rate
NAD+: $249 — printed as 'NAD+ Ampule (30-Day) - Starting at $249+'. The same page prices an in-clinic NAD+ drip separately at a different figure; the two are recorded as two products, not merged
Nip & Tuck Wellness Institute also sells 5 compounds this site boards without publishing a price for them: CJC-1295 (board ranks no provider), Ipamorelin (board ranks no provider), KPV (board ranks no provider), TB-500 (board ranks no provider) and Semax (board ranks no provider).
Nip & Tuck Wellness Institute is not a paid partner; this link may earn a commission if that changes. Full disclosure.
By Nora Castellan, Standards EditorUpdated September 2026
A number against eight compounds
Tesamorelin, sermorelin, BPC-157, GHK-Cu, MOTS-c, epitalon, PT-141 and NAD+ each carry a published figure. Most sellers here publish none at all.
The page also states the seller's own overall range in plain words, and says the span depends on the protocol and the level of clinical oversight. Naming the reason a range is wide is unusual and useful.
The practice sells more compounds than it prices. Thirteen are carried in total, so five of them arrive at the number only through a conversation.
Two sermorelin figures, one page
One table on the page prints a sermorelin figure marked as monthly. A branded table lower on the same page prints a different, lower sermorelin figure marked as a starting point.
Both are published today, on one page, with nothing explaining the gap between them. The seller has not said which applies to a given buyer.
This review records the higher of the two and states the conflict rather than settling it. A reader should ask which figure their protocol falls under before agreeing to anything.
A table headed monthly, filled with floors
Almost every entry is marked with a plus sign, which makes it a floor rather than a settled rate. The table heading says monthly, but a floor is not a billing cycle.
The seller's own stated range confirms the point. Its published span for peptide therapy is wide enough that the bottom of it cannot describe most protocols.
Every row here is therefore recorded as not monthly. That is not a criticism of the disclosure, which is better than most; it is a refusal to treat a starting point as a rate.
Forms and stacks priced apart, and who stands behind it
Oral BPC-157 and injectable BPC-157 carry different figures, and a NAD+ ampule for home use is priced separately from an in-clinic drip. Those are treated as separate products rather than averaged together.
Multi-peptide stacks are priced separately from the single compounds inside them, including a recovery stack containing BPC-157 and a pairing of GHK-Cu with epitalon.
No corporate entity is published on the pages read; the practice is identified by a named physician instead. No state list appears and no dispensing pharmacy is named.
Who it's for
Readers who want a number against each compound rather than a quote request.
Buyers who want the seller's own overall price range stated in plain words.
Anyone comparing oral and injectable forms of the same compound.
People who want multi-peptide stacks priced apart from the compounds inside them.
Who should look elsewhere
Anyone who wants one settled sermorelin price rather than two published side by side.
Readers who need a rate rather than a floor marked with a plus sign.
Buyers who want the operating company named rather than a practice identified by its physician.
Shoppers who need a state list or a named dispensing pharmacy.
Strengths
Publishes a figure for eight separate tracked compounds on one page
States its own overall price range in plain words rather than leaving it to be inferred
Prices oral and injectable forms of the same compound separately
Prices multi-peptide stacks separately from the single compounds inside them
Trade-offs
Publishes two different sermorelin figures on one page with no explanation
Almost every figure is a floor marked with a plus sign rather than a settled rate
Publishes no corporate entity, only a named physician
Publishes no state list and names no dispensing pharmacy
How we verified this
Read the pricing page in full and recorded a figure for each of the eight compounds it prices.
Recorded both sermorelin figures published on that page, kept the higher one, and left the conflict between them unresolved.
Treated each figure marked with a plus sign as a floor rather than a monthly rate, including those under a heading that says monthly.
Kept oral and injectable forms of the same compound as separate entries, and kept multi-peptide stacks separate from the compounds they contain.
Read the pages for a corporate entity, a state list and a named dispensing pharmacy, and recorded that none of the three appears.
A provider to compare Nip & Tuck Wellness Institute 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.
The seller publishes both on one page, in two different tables, with no explanation. This review records the higher figure and states the conflict rather than choosing between them.
Are the figures monthly rates?
No. Almost every one is marked with a plus sign, which makes it a starting point. The seller's own stated range is wide enough that the floor will not describe most protocols.
Is oral BPC-157 priced the same as the injection?
No. The page prices them separately and the oral form is lower. Neither figure is averaged into the other here.
Which company runs the practice?
The pages read publish no corporate entity. The practice is identified by a named physician, and no dispensing pharmacy is named anywhere.
Nip & Tuck Wellness Institute is not a paid partner; this link may earn a commission if that changes. Full disclosure.