The claims this storefront makes
NuScience Peptides makes modest claims for itself, and the most important statement in its file was not written by the company. The storefront sells about 50 listings in vials, capsules and blends at mid-market prices, describes itself as based in Albuquerque, New Mexico, and says its products are third-party tested with a public results page. In-stock orders placed before noon Eastern ship the same day, US shipping is free over $200, and everything is labeled for research use only. No certification, purity guarantee or returns policy is stated. The catalog includes BPC-157 in 5 mg, 10 mg and 20 mg sizes, a BPC157 and TB500 blend, a CJC-1295 and Ipamorelin blend, GHK-Cu, NAD+, Semax, Selank and GLP-class products under coded names. The one thing a buyer should know is that on August 24, 2026 the FDA sent this company a warning letter, and the address on that letter is not in New Mexico.
We read the homepage, the about page, the BPC-157 product page and the lab test results page. We opened certificates and looked for a laboratory name and lot numbers, compared the site’s stated location with the address on the FDA letter and with the area code of the published phone number, read the FDA letter in full on fda.gov, and pulled Finnrick’s product and vendor pages.
What held up when we checked
The results page exists and is open. Roughly 50 certificates are linked as PDF or PNG files at nusciencepeptides.com/nuscience-lab-test-results/ and open without a login, which puts this supplier ahead of the many that publish nothing. HPLC and mass spectrometry are the methods recorded in our file. A phone number, (704) 666-1701, and an email address are published. The shipping terms are as stated: same-day dispatch for in-stock orders before noon Eastern, free over $200. A research-use disclaimer is present.
Pricing is visible, if imprecise. BPC-157 is listed across 5 mg, 10 mg and 20 mg at $34.99 to $109.00, with the 5 mg price not tied explicitly to its size on the page, so we recorded $34.99 as the low end of the range rather than as a confirmed 5 mg figure. That places the company in the middle of the market.
What did not, and what we could not verify
The research-use framing has been rejected by the regulator. The FDA issued a warning letter to NuScience Peptides LLC dated August 24, 2026, reference MARCS-CMS 733652, published at https://www.fda.gov/inspections-compliance-enforcement-and-criminal-investigations/warning-letters/nuscience-peptides-llc-733652-08242026. The letter concerns nine products named in the letter, including GLP-class products, which the FDA states are unapproved new drugs, and it states that the research-use-only disclaimer does not alter that conclusion. It was addressed to the managers of the company at 20311 Chartwell Center Dr., Suite 212, Cornelius, NC 28031. Our record notes it was one of five letters the FDA sent to peptide sellers that day. A warning letter is a public fact rather than a verdict, and we report it as the FDA wrote it.
The address does not match. The website says Albuquerque. The FDA addressed its letter to a suite in Cornelius, North Carolina. The company’s published phone number has a 704 area code, which belongs to the Charlotte area, a short drive from Cornelius, and not to New Mexico. Taken together, the site’s stated location appears not to be where the company operates, and the address the FDA used is the one a buyer should assume is real.
The catalog is also a compliance observation. Alongside BPC-157 and the blends, the site lists GLP-class products under coded names, and the nine products named in the letter include several of that kind. We quote the coded names only as the supplier writes them and do not expand them. A buyer who wants to know whether a given listing is one the FDA named should read the letter, which lists them by the names the company uses.
The certificates have no author and no lot. No laboratory is named on the results page or anywhere in our record. Lot numbers are not visible on the page; the filenames carry dates and numbers, but a purchaser cannot match a certificate to a vial from the page itself. Whether any certificate is per lot, and whether endotoxin or sterility testing is performed, are both unknown. Payment methods, returns and any guarantee are all unstated, and international shipping is not addressed.
The independent record is poor. Finnrick, an independent testing aggregator, reports 19 of 49 tests passed. BPC-157 is rated 50 percent in Finnrick’s file, with measured fills of 4.09 to 4.19 mg against a 5 mg label, meaning the vials Finnrick measured contained roughly a fifth less material than the label stated. CJC-1295 is rated 25 percent. Those are Finnrick’s findings, not ours, and they are the only independent measurements that exist.
Our read
A warning letter is a public fact, not a verdict, and some suppliers who receive one correct course and publish what they changed. But this letter lands on a company whose website gives a city in the wrong state, whose certificates name no laboratory and carry no lot numbers, whose independent retests fail more often than they pass, and whose BPC-157 vials, by Finnrick’s measurement, come in a fifth short of the label. The open certificate page is the only thing in the record that pulls the other way, and without a laboratory name it does not pull hard.
A research purchaser should read the FDA letter in full before considering an order, should treat the Cornelius, North Carolina address as the company’s real one, and should ask why the website says otherwise. Until the company names its laboratory, publishes lot numbers and addresses the letter publicly, we see no basis for ordering here.
