# About Oath Research Scam Investigation: An Independent Editorial Review

> About this site — an independent editorial review of the Oath Research scam framing. We are not affiliated with Oath Research. We do not sell research peptides, accept advertising from peptide vendors, or receive commission on purchases. Our methodology is publicly-available documentary evidence and editorial judgment.

## The publication

Oath Research Scam Investigation is an independent editorial review of Oath Research. We are not affiliated with the company we review. We do not sell research peptides, accept advertising from peptide vendors, or receive commission on purchases through any vendor we cover. We have no financial relationship with Oath Research, Freedom Diagnostics, RealPeptidesScores, or any vendor mentioned in our analysis. Our methodology relies on publicly available documentary evidence — laboratory reports listed in public COA archives, third-party listings, customer-review platforms, vendor-scoring sites, and the federal CMS CLIA database — combined with editorial judgment about how to weigh and present that evidence.

## What we publish, and what we don't

We publish an editorial dossier on one specific scam framing of one specific research-peptide supplier. We do not publish dosage guidance — there is none here, and there will not be. We do not publish medical advice — this is not a medical site. We do not adjudicate competing vendors against each other beyond the narrow context where a cross-reviewer divergence is structurally load-bearing for the investigation (Layer 2 of the Finnrick dismantle). We do not recommend products; we evaluate evidence.

## The editorial 'we'

When this site uses the first-person plural — "we examined," "we found," "our analysis" — it is the editorial 'we' of a publication, not the marketing 'we' of a vendor. The publication is the entity that bears responsibility for the investigation. We do not invent named reviewers, named analysts, or named editors; the investigation is conducted in the publication's voice, not in the voice of a fabricated staff list. Decisions about what to publish, what to dispatch, and what to acknowledge as gap or caveat are made by the editorial side of the masthead.

## What we did not do

We did not contact Oath Research for comment or for additional documentation beyond what is publicly available. We did not contact Freedom Diagnostics. We did not contact Finnrick Analytics or peptidescore.com. We did not contact ScamAdviser or Scam-Detector. The investigation is conducted entirely against the publicly available record on the dates referenced. A different methodology — one that included direct outreach — could produce different findings on the items we acknowledge as gaps (the founding date, the upstream CDMO identity, shipping and refund handling). Our methodology is intentionally archival; the trade-off is what we report on the gaps section of /verdict.

## Conflicts and disclosures

We have no commercial relationship with any party named in this investigation. We do not earn affiliate revenue. We do not accept advertising from peptide vendors. We do not solicit payment from rated parties, and we would refuse it if offered — the analytic question we engaged in the Finnrick dismantle (whether monetizing rated parties disqualifies independent-reviewer status) applies to us in the same direction. The publication runs on the editorial side of the masthead and stays there.

## Corrections policy

We treat factual errors as the highest editorial priority. If a reader identifies a specific factual error — a misquoted statistic, a miscited URL, a misattributed claim — we will correct it, dated, with the original error preserved as a strikethrough or marginalia note. Editorial disagreements that do not rest on factual error will be acknowledged in good faith but will not be resolved by changing the published analysis.

## Colophon

This site is set in **Bricolage Grotesque** (display), **Inter** (body), and **DM Mono** (numerals and identifiers). The aesthetic register is **Executive Dashboard** in the tradition of designmd.app — board-deck cover-stock graphite-navy on paper-white, status-color rules (verified forest / examined amber / unsupported crimson), squared corners, no shadows, no animations beyond reduced-motion-friendly hover transitions. Static editorial print artifact, translated to web.

---

A desk-officer's intake brief on one research-peptide supplier's scam framing — two allegations logged, five layers walked, dispatched against the verifiable public record on this side of the masthead.