Ranked board
The sellers that name the states they cannot reach
Nearly every company here claims something about geography, and almost all of it is unfalsifiable: available nationwide, available in most states, not available everywhere. A named exclusion is different — it is a specific, checkable statement you can act on before handing over a card. Five companies publish one. The register below quotes what everyone else says instead.
Disclosure: Some links on this site are affiliate or referral links. If you start a treatment or buy a product through them, we may earn a commission at no additional cost to you. Read our full disclosure.
What gets on this board
Every published review where the company names at least one specific state it will not serve, or names a state where a particular product is withheld. A count with no names does not qualify, and neither does “not available in all states”.
What decides the order
Ranked by how much of what each company sells is described accurately — the share of the products this board counts whose marketing claim matches the trials behind it. Ties go to the company with more matching claims, then to the one that names its pharmacy, then to the one that publishes a testing regime, and last of all to alphabetical order. Nothing is pinned, sponsored, or lifted into position.
What the grading found
12/43
Claims that match the trials
Across every one of these companies' graded products that we have graded.
2/8
Name their pharmacy
A telehealth brand is almost never the pharmacy that fills the order.
0
Publish a readable certificate
Of every company reviewed on this site, not just those on this board.
The ranking
Every product counted here was graded against the published trials for that molecule, using the company's own words about it. The three counts below are that grading, and they are the ranking — there is no score, no weighting and no adjustment behind them.
The named exclusion is what puts a company on this board; the counts beside it are its whole graded catalogue, so the ranking still turns on claim accuracy.
| Company | Claims vs. trials | Discloses | Visit |
|---|---|---|---|
3/650%
| Testing shown | Visit | |
Trellis Vitality Checked August 2026 | 2/540%
| Pharmacy namedTesting shown | Visit |
2/540%
| Testing shown | Visit | |
Regenics Checked August 2026 | 2/633%
| Testing shown | Visit |
1/520%
| Nothing published | Visit | |
Vyvron Checked August 2026 | 1/520%
| Nothing published | Visit |
AgelessRx Checked August 2026 | 1/617%
| Testing shown | Visit |
PeptidesRx Checked August 2026 | 0/50%
| Pharmacy namedTesting shown | Not linked |
How a claim is graded, and what moves a compound between evidence tiers, is on our methodology page.
What this board does not measure
Whether it works
A company can describe a weakly-evidenced product accurately and rank well here. What the evidence says about each molecule is on its own graded compound page, and the two questions are deliberately kept apart.
Clinical care
We read public pages. We have not been a patient of any of these companies, have not assessed a consultation, and publish no quality score of any kind.
Price
Prices appear on a review as a note where a company publishes one, and they are not part of this ranking. A cheaper company is not lower here and a dearer one is not higher.
Product quality
Not one company reviewed here publishes a certificate of analysis a customer can read. Until that changes, nothing on this site can tell you what is in a vial.
Considered, and not on this board
10 companies were inside this board's candidate net and did not meet its rule. Each one has a published review here, and none was left off for an unflattering result.
- 1st Optimal
Names no state it will not serve. Its licensing statement reads: “Licensed providers in all 50 states, per the provider's own statement; not independently verified”.
- Auren Rx
Names no state it will not serve. Its licensing statement reads: “All 50 US states, by Auren Rx's own statement, with formulation-level caveats”.
- Defy Medical
Names no state it will not serve. Its licensing statement reads: “Not published — no state count, list or checker appears anywhere on the site”.
- Hone Health
Names no state it will not serve. Its licensing statement reads: “Not published. Across 107 pages, Hone names no state, no count and no exclusion for its clinical service”.
- Invigor Medical
Names no state it will not serve. Its licensing statement reads: “50 states, by Invigor's own home-page claim”.
- Lighter You
Names no state it will not serve. Its licensing statement reads: “Not disclosed. Lighter You states only that it is "[n]ot available in all 50 states" and names no state anywhere”.
- NovoCare Pharmacy
Names no state it will not serve. Its licensing statement reads: “All 50 US states and territories, per Novo Nordisk's own programme terms”.
- Rehydra+ Wellness
Names no state it will not serve. Its licensing statement reads: “20 states, which Rehydra+ does not name”.
- The Edit Health
Names no state it will not serve. Its licensing statement reads: “All 50 US states, by The Edit's own statement”.
- Valhalla Vitality
Names no state it will not serve. Its licensing statement reads: “Not published. No state, count or exclusion appears anywhere across the 113 non-blog pages”.
Frequently asked questions
Is a longer exclusion list a worse sign?
It is usually a better one. A company naming twenty states it cannot reach has told you something true and specific; a company claiming all fifty has either a genuine nationwide footprint or a marketing line nobody checked. This board does not rank by the length of the list — it ranks by claim accuracy like every board here — and being on it at all is the disclosure.
Why does a nationwide claim not qualify?
Because it is a positive claim with no exclusion in it, and the thing worth publishing is the exclusion. Several companies on this site claim all fifty states on one page and suppress specific products in named states on another. Where we found that, the named states are what put the company on this board — the contradiction is reported on its review.
Nothing pinned
Medical disclaimer: This content is for general educational purposes only and is not medical advice, diagnosis, or treatment. Always consult a licensed healthcare professional before starting, stopping, or changing any treatment.