VITAstir Review

What VITAstir charges

• NAD+: $91/mo — the advertised current price of a home kit the page calls a 1 Month Supply; the same page prints $449.00 as the original price, and nothing on it establishes what that original price was charged at
• Glutathione: $79/mo — the advertised current price of a home kit the page calls a 30 Day supply; the same page prints $289.00 as the original price, and nothing on it establishes what that original price was charged at

The box is described, which is rare here

The NAD+ kit page lists twenty injections at a named dose per injection, the syringes, the alcohol pads and a supply length of one month.

The glutathione kit page lists ten injections, a thirty-day supply, syringes and alcohol pads, and names the route and the injection site.

Most sellers compared here print a figure and a compound name. Listing the contents is what lets a reader work out whether two prices buy the same thing.

Both pages describe access to a prescriber as part of the kit rather than as a separate line item.

Both prices are sale prices, and the page does not say against what

Each product page prints an original price with a line through it and a current price beside it. The reductions are large on both products.

A reduction only means something if the original was really charged, openly and for a reasonable stretch. Neither page says when its original price applied or for how long.

This site records the current advertised figure and names the struck figure in the row's qualifier, so a reader can see what the claim is measured against. It makes no claim that either original price was ever charged.

Nothing on either page describes lab work as included. Two of the forty-five sellers here describe labs as included; this is not one of them.

Payment first, decision after

The NAD+ page says that after the product is bought, a prescriber may call within twenty-four hours, and that a buyer is refunded immediately if the request is not approved.

That is a clear statement of the order of events, and it is not the order most sellers here describe. A refund promise is not the same as an approval before payment.

The terms and conditions name the operating company and its trading name, which is a real answer to who takes the money.

The governing-law clause in those terms is an unfilled template. The live document still carries a state name inside square brackets, so nothing on the page settles which law applies.

A vitamin-injection shop with two tracked compounds

NAD+ and glutathione are the compounds this site tracks here. The rest of the shop is vitamin injections, and the company also runs walk-in clinics.

Treating this as a peptide clinic would misdescribe it. It is a retailer of injectable kits that happens to carry two products this site compares.

No state coverage list appears in the terms or the privacy policy. Twenty-four of the forty-five sellers here publish none, and this is one of them.

Ten of the forty-five sellers compared here name the facility that fills an order, and this is one of the thirty-five that do not. Neither compound is an FDA-approved finished drug in the form sold here.

How we verified this

• Read both product pages as rendered text and recorded the current advertised figure, not the struck one.
• Took the kit contents, the supply lengths and the route of administration from the page a buyer sees.
• Named the struck figure inside each price qualifier rather than dropping it, so the reduction can be read for what it is.
• Read the sentence about the prescriber call and the refund in full, and recorded the order of events it describes.
• Took the operating company and its trading name from the terms and conditions.
• Read the governing-law clause and confirmed the square brackets are in the live document rather than an artifact of how it was read.
• Read the terms and the privacy policy for a state coverage sentence and found none.
• Probed the host with a nonsense path in the same pass and confirmed it answers with its own not-found page.
• Searched the published federal warning-letter record for the brand across the years that record covers, and found no letter to it. That record does not include untitled letters.
• Re-counted the labs-included, no-state-list and pharmacy-naming claims against the current roster rather than reusing earlier figures.