Frequently asked questions

The catalogue lists named research compounds, blends and supplies. Each listing shows the product name, category, available formats and strengths, and price in CAD. The catalogue does not imply a medical use, approved indication or suitability for human consumption.

Yes. Prices throughout this site are displayed in Canadian dollars (CAD). The demonstration cart keeps the same currency; shipping and checkout are simulated, not live services.

PEPTIVIA presents its catalogue for a Canadian audience, uses CAD pricing and links to Canadian regulatory information where relevant. This does not mean a research material is an authorized medicine or that it was manufactured in Canada.

A single-compound listing names one research material. A blend names more than one component in the same listing. When comparing either, check the exact component names, the stated quantity and any product-specific documents rather than relying on the category label alone.

No. Milligrams describe a quantity of material. Concentration describes an amount per volume and cannot be determined from the vial quantity alone. This site does not provide preparation, dosing, injection or self-treatment instructions.

Lyophilized describes material that has been freeze-dried. It describes a physical form, not a guarantee of identity, purity, sterility, stability or suitability for a particular use.

Follow the instructions for the specific product and its documentation. Sequence and formulation can affect stability. Moisture, air and light may matter, repeated freeze-thaw cycles can be detrimental, and solutions are generally less stable than lyophilized material. Do not replace product-specific instructions with a generic rule.

Different sequences, formulations, containers and handling histories can have different stability considerations. Record the supplied instructions, receipt date, storage location and any temperature excursions so the material’s history remains traceable.

A COA is a document reporting specified results for an identified material or lot. Read the methods, identifiers, dates and results together. A COA should not be treated as proof of properties it did not test.

Compare the product name and lot or batch identifier on the vial with the report. Also check the report date, testing laboratory, sample description and method. If identifiers are absent or conflict, the document cannot be confidently matched from the information shown.

Identity asks whether the measured material is consistent with the named compound. Purity estimates the relative amount represented by the target signal under a stated method. One does not automatically establish the other, so look for the method and result associated with each claim.

No. A purity result does not establish sterility. Sterility, endotoxin, identity, content and purity are different questions that require appropriate methods. Never infer an unreported result from a purity percentage.

A research-use label does not determine whether a product is regulated as a drug, establish authorisation, or demonstrate safety or effectiveness. PEPTIVIA catalogue items are presented for laboratory research only and not for human consumption. Health Canada’s Canadian requirements apply based on the product and its intended use, not the label alone.

Use Health Canada’s Drug Product Database to search a specific product by Drug Identification Number (DIN), product name, active ingredient or company. Authorization belongs to the specific product record. Finding the same ingredient name does not establish that an unrelated research vial is authorized.

Start with the product page for the compound name, category, stated vial quantity and price. For any specification not displayed, do not assume a value. Product-specific documentation should identify the material and the lot it describes.

No. Catalogue images help distinguish products; they are not exact packaging specifications and should not be used to verify a label or lot identifier.

Start with the parts of the document that can be checked: a report or certificate number, a named issuing laboratory with a contact route, the dates received, tested and issued, and a sample description in the laboratory’s own words. If a contact route exists, the laboratory can confirm whether the report number and sample description are theirs. The report alone does not establish that the tested sample came from your container. That link requires traceable sampling and chain-of-custody records.

It is the documented sequence of who held a sample, and when, between it being taken and being analysed. Reports for research materials often do not include one. Without it, the report describes a sample the laboratory received, and the link from that sample to a specific vial depends on records held elsewhere.

No. Purity is a relative, method-specific measurement of how much of the detected peptide-related material is the target compound. It is not a sterility test, an endotoxin test, a stability result, or an assessment of safety or effectiveness in people. Those are separate questions requiring their own methods.

Purity asks what proportion of the detected peptide material is the target. Content asks how much of the sample’s mass is peptide at all, since water, salts and counter-ions add mass. Biological activity asks whether the molecule produces a defined effect in a specified system. Three questions, three methods, three results that can disagree.

Keep the three descriptions of the same material side by side — as listed, as labelled, as reported — for compound name, quantity, form, lot identifier, report reference and dates. Add your own internal reference, supplier and order details, receipt date and condition, storage location, handling events and any deviation. Record anything a source does not state as “not stated” rather than leaving it blank.

Treat it as unmatched rather than a typo. Transcribe both codes exactly as printed, record the mismatch, and ask the seller which lot the container belongs to. A near-match is not a match.

Name the evidence tier first — anecdote, cell study, animal study or human trial. Then trace the citation to the primary source, check that the population and the product match the claim, read the endpoint that was actually measured, and note who benefits if you believe it. A claim with no traceable reference is an assertion, and there is nothing further to audit.

GLP-3 is our informal customer-facing name for retatrutide. The “3” points to the three named receptor targets discussed in published research: GLP-1, GIP and glucagon. It is not the scientific name of a receptor.

Because a finding belongs to the system it was produced in. A result in cultured cells describes those cells, a result in an animal model describes that species under those conditions, and a human trial result describes a defined population against a stated comparator. Moving between those tiers is a separate evidence step each time.

No. Research on components individually is not evidence about a combination, which would need to be studied as a combination. Where a blend’s component ratio has not been documented, this site does not state one.

In an advisory dated 9 April 2026, Health Canada warned people not to inject peptides bought online, stating that unauthorized products have not been assessed for safety, efficacy or quality and can cause serious harm. The advisory is worth reading in full at the source, which we link from our Canada guide.

No. Health Canada’s advisory states that research-use wording does not exempt a product from Canadian requirements or make an unauthorized injectable product lawful. It is a statement of intended use, not an authorization category and not a safety assessment. Nothing on this site claims that PEPTIVIA or its catalogue has been assessed or authorized by Health Canada.

No. Authorization belongs to a specific product record in Health Canada’s Drug Product Database, identified by a Drug Identification Number. Finding the same ingredient name in an authorized product says nothing about a different vial from a different source.

This demonstration adapts owner-provided research content for PEPTIVIA, a supplier preview rather than a live seller. The original seller-authored framing carries a commercial context. Our editorial policy page sets out how we distinguish source types, how dates are handled, and what we do not claim — including that no qualified medical or scientific reviewer has signed off on these pages.

No, and we do not claim otherwise. Scientific statements link the primary source — a published paper or an official product label — so you can check them yourself. We publish no dosing, preparation or administration guidance and no medical advice.

No, and this distinction runs through the whole site. Published research describes the molecule as studied, under defined conditions. It is not evidence about any particular vial’s identity, purity, content or handling, including ours.