Epithalon Price: What the Assay Does to $2.50 a Milligram

The Epithalon price at the supplier linked below is $50.00 for a 10 mg vial and $25.00 once the checkout code is applied, which is $5.00 and $2.50 per labelled milligram. There is one presentation, so there is no vial-size comparison to run.

That is the whole of the advertised arithmetic and it takes a line. The reason this listing is worth a page is that the laboratory report behind it disagrees with the label, quietly and in the direction that costs the seller money. The certificate says the vial holds 9.64 mg, not 10 mg. Every per-milligram figure in the paragraph above divides by a number the vendor printed. There is a second set of figures that divides by a number somebody measured, and this page publishes both.

The listing every figure below is taken from:

What the Epithalon price is at each quantity

The published quantity tiers apply to the list price rather than to the discounted one: 3 percent off at three vials, 5 percent at five, 10 percent at ten. The table exists mostly so the final row has something to be compared against.

The last row is a different kind of saving from the four above it. Ten vials at the 10 percent tier remove $50.00 from a $500 basket; the code removes $25.00 from a single $50.00 order. Whether the code applies to more than one vial in a basket, and whether it combines with a tier, is not stated in the published terms, so this page does not claim that it does. Build the basket, enter the code, read the order summary before paying. Carriage is free above $250, which the ten-vial tier clears at $450.00 and the five-vial tier misses by $12.50.

The line on the certificate that moves the divisor

The supplier publishes a certificate for batch 15-05260628, certified 23 May 2026 by Kovera Labs under report number KVR-2026-A36FF4. On it, under the heading net content, against a specification written as 10 mg plus or minus 10 percent, is the figure 9.64 mg.

Two things are true about that number and both need saying. The first is that it passes. The accepted band runs from 9.00 mg to 11.00 mg and 9.64 mg sits inside it, 3.6 percent below the printed label. Nothing on the document is out of specification. The second is that the shortfall is real money, and the honest per-milligram figures are these:

Nine cents a milligram is not a scandal. What it is worth is the disclosure. A vendor that measures the fill and prints a figure below its own label is publishing the one line on the page that a marketing department would prefer to omit, and it is the strongest thing the document says about how the vendor handles documents. The same measurement on this site has run the other way: the Selank lot we worked through in our reading of what a Selank milligram costs assayed 12.29 mg against a 10 mg label, which flattered the buyer by the same mechanism that this one does not. Neither outcome is a feature of the product. Both are outcomes of a filling run, graded against a tolerance that exists precisely because filling runs vary.

One consequence worth stating plainly, because it is the version that reaches a bench: ten vials at the tier price is $450.00 for what the label calls 100 mg, and for what this batch would put at 96.4 mg. Ask for the certificate bearing the batch number printed on the vial you were actually sent, and read the net content line on that document rather than this one.

What else the price bought, and how much of it is a number

Read as a bill of work rather than a marketing document, the certificate carries five test results and a four-element metals screen. Each closes a different question, and they are not equally informative.

• Purity 99.312 percent against a specification of greater than 98 percent, by reversed-phase chromatography on a C18 column with diode-array detection at 214 nm. That wavelength sees the peptide bond itself, so the figure grades the proportion of ultraviolet-absorbing material eluting under the main peak. It is the result that speaks to peptide-related impurities: truncated, deleted and modified sequences left over from synthesis, which elute at their own retention times and appear as separate peaks.
• Identity confirmed by liquid chromatography with mass spectrometry. Purity and identity are different claims, and this is the one that matters more. A vial of the wrong compound, cleanly made, passes a purity test without difficulty.
• Net content 9.64 mg, discussed above. Most sellers in this market never weigh what is in the vial at all.
• Endotoxin safety screen, reported as a pass against an acceptance limit of 0.5 EU/mL or below. Endotoxin is a heat-stable fragment of gram-negative bacterial cell wall. It survives sterilisation and it is invisible in a chromatogram, which is why FDA treats pyrogen testing as its own discipline with its own guidance.
• Microbial sterility screen: no growth. A screen, and the word matters. It is not the compendial sterility test, and a research-supply document is under no obligation to run one.
• Heavy metals: arsenic, cadmium, lead and mercury each reported negative. Four analytes, four results, no numbers.

The candid observation about this particular document is that three of those results are outcomes rather than measurements. Purity and net content come back as figures you can divide by. The endotoxin screen comes back as a pass, the sterility screen as no growth, and the metals as negative, with no measured value and no stated limit of detection beside them. That is a weaker form of the same claim, and it is a fair thing to notice on a page about what money buys. The certificate also does not name the method behind the endotoxin result; the compendial reference procedure for that assay is USP Chapter 85, and a document that cites it is telling you more than a document that does not. For contrast without leaving the same storefront, the Semax batch discussed in our analysis of what a Semax milligram costs reported a numeric endotoxin figure, a named assay and spike recoveries across four pages. Same seller, same price bracket, more paper.

The multiplication people try, and why it is an estimate

A reader who has both figures usually multiplies them. Take 99.312 percent of 9.64 mg and you get about 9.57 mg, which at $25.00 is roughly $2.61 per milligram. That is a reasonable back-of-envelope number and it is not a mass balance, because the two results are not the same kind of measurement. Net content is a weight. Chromatographic purity is an area percentage, the share of detector response under the main peak relative to everything else the detector saw at 214 nm. It does not see water, it does not see counterion, and it does not see anything that fails to absorb at that wavelength. Multiplying a weight by an area percentage produces an approximation whose error bars nobody has published.

The distinction matters more than it sounds, because peptide vials are lyophilised solids that carry residual moisture and salt, and the mass on the balance includes both. We set out the same problem in the other direction, on a product where the milligram is weighed rather than assayed, in our analysis of a weighed rather than assayed milligram. For this page the safe statement is the narrow one: $2.50 per labelled milligram, $2.59 per assayed milligram on batch 15-05260628, and an approximate $2.61 if you insist on folding purity in.

What no price settles

A price is chosen after the fact. Identity, purity, quantity, endotoxin load and metals are measurements made on material before any figure was attached to it, and a measurement is only as good as the procedure behind it, which is the principle ICH Q2(R2) sets out for regulated analytical work. Research-supply certificates carry no such obligation, so a named laboratory, a report number, a batch number, a stated method and a visible chromatographic trace are worth more than a large percentage in a large font.

What no amount of testing buys is a settled case for the compound. This is a synthetic tetrapeptide, four residues, Ala-Glu-Asp-Gly: PubChem CID 219042, formula C14H22N4O9, molecular weight 390.35. FDA and PubChem spell it Epitalon; the buying market spells it Epithalon; it is one molecule. It is marketed on telomere and longevity claims that trace largely to one research group in St Petersburg, whose 2004 report of human somatic cells passing their usual division limit in culture is the paper most often cited for them. That is cell culture. No registered controlled human trial establishes a longevity outcome, and this page does not assert one. FDA states that compounded drugs containing epitalon may pose a risk for immunogenicity for certain routes of administration due to the potential for aggregation and peptide-related impurities, and that it lacks sufficient information to know whether the drug would cause harm if administered to humans. The nomination that would have put it on the compounding bulks list was withdrawn, and it appears in none of the three categories of the 503A list updated on 14 May 2026.

There are no quantities on this page, because quantity is not a price question. For how this site grades material sold under research-use terms generally, see what research-use supply actually means.