Trust Providers we don't recommend — and why
We evaluate every GLP-1 program against the same 31-point methodology. A few fail it
outright — usually because the FDA has cited their marketing, or because we can't verify
how they operate. Here's who they are, and the public records behind each call.
Our standard, and why this page exists.
A provider is automatically
not recommended — no matter how it would
otherwise score — if the FDA cites its marketing as false or misleading, if it shows
documented fake reviews, or if it prescribes with no licensed clinician involved. 3 of
the 4 companies below hold an FDA warning letter. And several of them run
affiliate programs we could have joined. Failing our standards means they are not options
we'll send you to — regardless of commissions. That's the whole point of
our methodology.
MEDVi
FDA warning letterThe FDA cited MEDVi's marketing as false or misleading, and independent reporting documented AI-generated "doctors" and deepfaked patient photos.
- The FDA issued MEDVi a warning letter for marketing that falsely implied its compounded drugs were FDA-approved and that MEDVi was the compounder (February 2026). FDA warning letter #721455 ↗
- An investigation by Futurism documented AI-generated "doctor" accounts, deepfaked before-and-after patient photos, and fake New York Times and Forbes logos used in its advertising. Futurism investigation ↗
- It sells compounded GLP-1s — including oral tirzepatide, a form with no human-trial data that Eli Lilly and a class-action lawsuit call unproven.
- Its clinical partner, OpenLoop, disclosed a data breach that exposed roughly 1.6 million records (January 2026).
Strut Health
FDA warning letterThe FDA cited Strut for marketing a "generic Zepbound, Mounjaro" — a drug that has no FDA-approved generic — and for implying it was the compounder.
- The FDA issued Strut a warning letter for labeling that implied Strut was the compounder and for a "Generic Zepbound, Mounjaro" claim — no FDA-approved generic of either drug exists (February 2026). FDA warning letter #721448 ↗
- It sells compounded semaglutide and tirzepatide with no disclosed lawful basis, now that the FDA shortage that once permitted mass compounding has ended.
- Independent reviews and BBB complaints describe cancellation obstacles and surprise auto-refill charges, and its advertised price swings from about $99 to $449 depending on the source.
Sprout Health
FDA warning letterSprout holds an FDA warning letter, and every independently verifiable review platform rates it poorly.
- The FDA issued Sprout Health a warning letter for false or misleading claims that implied its compounded GLP-1s were FDA-approved (September 2025). FDA warning letter #715879 ↗
- It carries a 1-out-of-5 BBB customer rating (not accredited), with dozens of complaints — roughly a third left unanswered — citing non-delivery, unauthorized billing, and no way to cancel.
- There are too few independent reviews to score it fairly, and the verifiable ones are strongly negative — the opposite of the "overwhelmingly positive" picture painted on affiliate-run review blogs.
Maximus
Editorial judgmentMaximus has no FDA warning letter, but it's a men's testosterone clinic first — a poor fit for most GLP-1 patients — and sells compounded drugs we can't verify.
- It sells compounded semaglutide and tirzepatide from a pharmacy it declines to name, and discloses no lawful basis for compounding now that the drug shortages have ended.
- It is primarily a men's testosterone clinic; weight loss is a secondary offering it frames as a way to "support testosterone" — a poor fit for most people seeking GLP-1 care.
- There aren't enough weight-loss-specific reviews to score it fairly, and a "from $99.99/month" promo triples to $299.99 after a required three-month commitment, with early cancellations converted to non-refundable credit.
These summaries reflect our reading of public records — FDA warning letters, Better Business
Bureau profiles, independent reporting, and the companies' own marketing — as of June 2026.
Companies change. If you believe something here is out of date or inaccurate, please
tell us — we
publish corrections
when we get something wrong. The "editorial judgment" label marks calls based on our own
analysis rather than an FDA action.