Entry type describes why and how a record sits in the atlas. It is not an efficacy score, risk ranking, product-quality result, or jurisdictional authorization.
The full inclusion policy is in Scope and selection; claim support is graded separately under Evidence grading.
The five entry types
| Entry type | Defining criterion | Example | Required reading caution |
|---|---|---|---|
| Approved | A named product has current authorization in at least one documented jurisdiction | Semaglutide | Approval remains product-, use-, population-, jurisdiction-, and date-specific |
| A clinical-stage candidate with scientific or public relevance. Investigation is not approval, and a studied exposure is not a recommendation. Fuente de la definición: Scope and selection methodology · Glosario | A candidate is in clinical development without identified marketing authorization | Retatrutide | Development evidence does not itself establish approval |
| An entry with substantial scientific visibility or identity value. Biological rationale and non-human evidence do not establish patient benefit. Fuente de la definición: Scope and selection methodology · Glosario | The peptide occurs biologically and is included for scientific visibility | GHK-Cu | Biological presence does not establish a marketed product claim |
| An entry with frequent visibility in the research-peptide ecosystem. Visibility is not endorsement, and marketed material is not assumed safe, sterile, authentic, or suitable for humans. Fuente de la definición: Scope and selection methodology · Glosario | The name is frequently marketed without identified approval for human use | BPC-157 | A listing proves marketing, not suitability, identity, quality, or benefit |
| Boundary case | Identity, composition, or scope does not fit a simple single-substance class | Thymalin | Preserve ambiguity instead of forcing one sequence or structure |
The stored catalog distinguishes fields such as approved drug and approved diagnostic within the approved context; the dated coverage snapshot includes one approved-diagnostic entry. The five explanatory cards do not erase those underlying record values.
- approved: current authorization in a jurisdiction
- investigational: clinical development; no identified approval
- endogenous: native biological visibility
- research-market: marketed without identified approval
- boundary case: identity or scope does not fit cleanly
Two independent dimensions
| Dimension | Question answered |
|---|---|
| Entry type | What scientific, clinical, market, or identity context explains inclusion? |
| Evidence grade | How well does current evidence support this exact claim? |
A single entry can have several claim grades. Entry type therefore cannot be used as a shortcut for evidence.
Research wording boundary
Research-use-only wording is a market statement, not a regulator’s finding that a material is authorized, authentic, pure, sterile, effective, or suitable for people. It also does not authorize a human study.
Human-subject research requires its own scientific, ethical, institutional, regulatory, and consent framework, summarized in Research governance and human subjects. A commercial listing cannot substitute for that framework.
How search targets differ
For approved products, the atlas prioritizes current official product information, regulatory actions, and pivotal controlled studies. For A clinical-stage candidate with scientific or public relevance. Investigation is not approval, and a studied exposure is not a recommendation. Fuente de la definición: Scope and selection methodology · Glosario candidates, it emphasizes current trial registries and published clinical reports. For An entry with frequent visibility in the research-peptide ecosystem. Visibility is not endorsement, and marketed material is not assumed safe, sterile, authentic, or suitable for humans. Fuente de la definición: Scope and selection methodology · Glosario entries, it also looks deliberately for decisive negative, terminated, retracted, or safety records that market narratives may omit.
Boundary and An entry with substantial scientific visibility or identity value. Biological rationale and non-human evidence do not establish patient benefit. Fuente de la definición: Scope and selection methodology · Glosario entries require extra identity work because one familiar name may not map cleanly to one product or chemical entity.
Dated refresh
Approval, trial, The World Anti-Doping Agency; its Prohibited List classifies many peptides as prohibited substances in sport. Fuente de la definición: WADA and sport regulation brief · Glosario, and legal-status claims are time-sensitive. Each carries an as-of or last-verified date and should be rechecked against the decisive current source.
An entry type can change when development or authorization status changes. The date records the review point; it does not guarantee future status.
Reading entry type together with evidence
Semaglutide is in an approved context and has several A claims plus a B row. Retatrutide is A clinical-stage candidate with scientific or public relevance. Investigation is not approval, and a studied exposure is not a recommendation. Fuente de la definición: Scope and selection methodology · Glosario and has B development-stage claims in the August 2026 monograph. BPC-157 is An entry with frequent visibility in the research-peptide ecosystem. Visibility is not endorsement, and marketed material is not assumed safe, sterile, authentic, or suitable for humans. Fuente de la definición: Scope and selection methodology · Glosario and has C and D claims. Those examples show that context, evidence, and jurisdictional status must be read together without collapsing them.
Before drawing a conclusion, name the entry type, exact claim and grade, product and jurisdiction, identity boundary, source, and verification date.