From the same team
Gym Product Review
We built a second review site, and it works the way this one does: a published formula, numbers you can check yourself, and no pay-to-rank.
Peptide Source Review rates vendors on lab evidence, shipping and refund terms, pricing, operating history, and transparency, and it publishes the weights so anyone can check the arithmetic. Gym Product Review applies the same idea to supplements: every product is scored on what its label actually says, and price is normalised to cost per gram rather than cost per scoop, the same way we use price per milligram here.
It is a separate site with a separate catalogue. Nothing on Peptide Source Review changes because of it: the scoring formula, the vendor rankings, and the affiliate disclosures on this site are unaffected, and the products reviewed there are ordinary consumer supplements rather than research materials.
Unbiased rankings, the same as here
The problem with supplement reviews is the same one we set out to fix in the peptide market: most of them are opinions with an affiliate link attached, and the ranking moves when the commission does. Gym Product Review is built the opposite way. Every product is scored by a published formula, the formula is printed on the site, and no brand can buy a position in the rankings. Affiliate relationships are disclosed and never change a score, which is the same rule we hold ourselves to on this site.
The scoring starts from arithmetic rather than adjectives. Value is measured as cost per gram of protein, creatine or sodium, or cost per serving, ranked against the rest of the category, so a cheaper tub with less protein cannot hide behind a lower shelf price. Formula quality is measured by how much of each key active meets the dose the published research actually used, with a penalty for proprietary blends that conceal the amounts. Buyer ratings are read from the brand's own storefront with a minimum review count, and the source is always shown. Each category is scored on its own axes, because a protein bar and a pre-workout are not comparable on the same ones.
It is the same philosophy behind our lab-credibility weighting here: publish the formula, show the evidence, and let the numbers put products where they belong.
Guides that explain the arithmetic
Alongside the rankings, the site publishes field guides written for people who would rather check a label themselves than take a score on faith: what the clinical dose thresholds actually are and where they come from, why citrulline malate and L-citrulline are not interchangeable, how proprietary blends hide under-dosing, how to spot amino spiking in a protein, and how to work out the real price per gram that the shelf tag obscures. If you have ever read a COA on this site and wanted the same level of detail applied to a supplement panel, that is what those guides are.
What it covers
- Protein powdersCost per gram of protein, not per scoop.
- Protein barsCost per gram of protein, plus protein per calorie and sugar-alcohol load.
- Protein snacksThe same protein math applied to chips, cookies, puffs and shakes.
- Pre-workoutsEach key ingredient's labelled dose checked against the dose clinical research used, with a penalty for proprietary blends.
- Energy drinksPrice per can, sugar and calorie load, and whether the caffeine content is disclosed.
- CreatineCost per gram of creatine itself, not per gram of everything else in the tub.
- ElectrolytesCost per gram of sodium, the electrolyte every label has to state.
- BCAA & EAACost per gram of essential amino acids.
- Skin and body-composition supportHow much of each formula the label discloses, and whether its doses reach clinical thresholds.
Research-use notice: products reviewed on Peptide Source Review are research materials and are not for human or veterinary use. Gym Product Review covers consumer supplements and is a separate publication.