🚩 On the watch list, its certificate can't be verified in its own name.
My Peptides claims an 'accredited' or 'UKAS-verified UK laboratory' but never names it. Accreditation you can't attribute to a named body is unfalsifiable, the word 'accredited' is doing PR work with nothing checkable behind it. (Note: Janoshik isn't even UK-based, so 'UK lab' is a tell it isn't them.)
The certificate, and what's wrong with it
🚩 self-made / in-house
What this certificate actually is: This is only a self-issued certificate from the seller, not an independent lab report.
What doesn't add up on its site
Quoted straight from my-peptides.co.uk, and why it falls apart.
“…uality assurance process is the backbone of everything we do. From sourcing raw materials from GMP-certified manufacturers to conducting in-house verification testing, we ensure that every vial that leav…”
Claims 'GMP certified', by whom? No certificate, no certifying body, no number. A badge with nothing behind it.
Pricing vs the market, benchmarked on BPC-157
BPC-157
£10/mg (≈ £100 for a 10 mg vial)
Versus market median (£3.0/mg)
3.33×, very expensive
Far above the market average. The Peptide Watch benchmarks every vendor on the same compound, BPC-157, the most common research peptide, as £ per milligram, so prices are directly comparable across all providers.
The audit checklist
Check
Result
Verifiable certificate in its own name
No
Independent lab named
None named / unverifiable
Tests its own stock
No evidence
Pricing vs market
3.33× median (very expensive)
Claims that don't add up
1 found
The bottom line. My Peptides sits on the watch list because it does not publish a certificate that can be verified in its own name. Everything above is observable on its own website and the public record. See the vendors whose certificates are actually their own →
⚠️ Is anything on this page wrong or out of date? Submit a correction request and we'll look into it, vendors welcome too.