Wisp Review

What Wisp charges

• Glutathione: $125/mo — starting at, per month, on the subscription — the block reads "Free Delivery / Starting at $125/ month / Choose a one-time treatment or subscription", and the one-time treatment's price is NOT published on that page, so this figure is the subscription rate only; a sitewide "15% off your first order" promotion was running when the figure was read, and $125 is the pre-discount rate

The period is in the price block, not a footnote

The product page prints the figure, the word month and the delivery arrangement in one block, and follows it with a line inviting a reader to choose a one-time treatment or a subscription.

Naming the period beside the figure rather than under an asterisk is a small thing that a surprising number of sellers here do not do. A reader learns what the number recurs on without hunting for a footnote.

What the block does not do is price the alternative. The one-time treatment is offered and carries no published figure, so the only number on the page is the subscription rate.

This row records that rate as the subscription rate and says so in the qualifier, because presenting it as the price of a single treatment would attach it to a purchase it does not describe.

A promotion was running when the figure was read

A sitewide banner offered a percentage off a first order under a code at the time of this reading. The figure recorded here is the one printed on the product page, before that discount.

A first-order discount is a one-off, and a comparison that ordered sellers by a discounted first payment would be ordering something nobody keeps paying.

So the pre-discount figure is what this site stores, and the promotion is recorded in the qualifier rather than in the number.

A reader checking the page today may see a different total at checkout for that reason, and the difference is the promotion rather than a price change.

One compound, inside a catalogue that is mostly something else

Eight of the fifty-three sellers here sell exactly one compound this site tracks, and this is one of them. The rest of the catalogue is reproductive and sexual health, urinary infection, menopause and weight care.

Two entries come close to a second compound and neither counts. One is described by the seller itself as a supplement rather than a prescription product, and the other is a cream whose page names no peptide at all.

This site does not read a compound into a product description. A category name is not a molecule, and a supplement is not the prescription preparation the boards here compare.

So this row is a single-compound row on a large operator, which is a different thing from a peptide specialist with one product.

A named company, a named law, and no state list

The terms name the operating company, give a mailing address and name the state whose law governs and the county whose courts have jurisdiction. That is a complete answer to a question many sellers here leave open.

The site also publishes a page setting out its clinicians' credentials, which very few sellers compared here do at all.

On coverage it says only that a user is located in the United States and that the service is intended for visitors within it. Its own pricing page names no state and does not mention this compound at all.

Twenty-nine of the fifty-three sellers here publish no state list, and this is one of them. Eleven of the fifty-three name the facility that fills an order; this is one of the forty-two that do not.

How we verified this

• Read the product page as rendered text in a browser and took the figure from the block that names the product, checking it had a laid-out box before recording it.
• Recorded that the same block offers a one-time treatment and publishes no figure for it, and wrote that into the qualifier rather than letting the subscription rate stand for both.
• Recorded the sitewide first-order promotion and stored the pre-discount figure, because a first-order rate is not a rate anyone keeps paying.
• Read the wellness catalogue entry that names this compound's better-known relative and confirmed the seller itself describes it as a supplement, then declined to declare it.
• Checked the cream the catalogue calls a peptide product and found no peptide named on its page, then declined to declare that either.
• Took every document path from the site's own link list rather than guessing one: a plausible terms path minted by hand returns a not-found page here, and the real paths are different.
• Read the terms for the operating company, the mailing address, the governing law and the jurisdiction, and read the pricing page for a state list and for this compound, finding neither.
• Confirmed the host answers a nonsense path with its own not-found page at two path depths in the same pass.
• Searched the published federal warning-letter record for the company name and found no letter to it. That record does not include untitled letters.
• Re-counted the one-compound, no-state-list and pharmacy-naming claims against the current roster rather than reusing earlier figures.