Arctic Lab Supply

Organic kit

Partner material. Not for public distribution.

← Partner resource library

KIT A — ORGANIC CONTENT

Use this kit for posts from your own account that you are NOT putting money behind.

If it gets boosted, Sparked, or run as an ad, stop and use AD-SAFE-KIT.md instead. Different rules, different reviewer, different video.

Read this part first: the organic surface is wider than you think

Most creators in this category self-censor into nothing. They think every sentence has to sound like a legal filing, so they post a slideshow of a vial with sad piano music and wonder why it did 400 views.

On an organic post from your own account, you are allowed to be a person. You can:

That is ordinary creator speech. It does not pass through ad review. Where people actually get killed is the six hard limits at the bottom of this file — and almost none of them are about what you're allowed to discuss. They're about instructing people.

The useful mental model: you can be a person who talks about this category. You cannot be a manual.

The disclosure line — use this verbatim

Put this on screen for at least 3 seconds within the first 5 seconds, and say it out loud:

Affiliate — I earn a commission if you use my link or code.

Spoken version, say it however sounds natural:

"Quick thing — affiliate link, I make money if you use it."

If Arctic sent you free product, use this one instead, both on screen and out loud:

Arctic sent me this free and I earn a commission if you use my link.

The platform's paid-partnership toggle does not count. Neither does a line buried in the caption, and neither does "#ad" alone in a wall of hashtags. It goes in the video. This is the FTC's actual position and it is also how TikTok's Branded Content Policy is being enforced right now — a lot of the takedowns in this category in the last few months were disclosure failures, not content failures.

Free product does not buy a positive review. Say what you actually think.

15 hooks. Pick one and film it.

Every hook below is written the way you'd say it out loud. Steal the hook, use your own voice for the rest.

The vetting angles — these are Arctic's home turf and they convert

1. "Nobody in this space can tell you what's actually in the vial. There's one document that can, and most people have never opened it."

Then: the four fields. → /learn/how-to-read-a-certificate-of-analysis

2. "I emailed the lab that supposedly issued a COA. They'd never heard of the company."

The strongest hook in the entire category. If you've genuinely done this, lead with it. If you haven't — do it, then post it. Every real COA has a certificate number and a verification route. → /learn/how-to-verify-a-certificate-of-analysis

3. "99.9% pure means almost nothing and I can show you why in thirty seconds."

A purity percentage under HPLC means the main peak was that share of the detected peak area. It doesn't establish what the main peak is, and it says nothing about water content, residual solvents, sterility, or anything the method can't see. This one makes people feel smart, which is why it gets shared.

4. "Three ways to spot a fake lab report before you spend a dollar."

Straight from Arctic's own page: (1) the lot number on the report doesn't match the label, (2) one report reused across several products or strengths, (3) no issuing laboratory named. → /batch-documentation

5. "The lot number is the whole game. If the number on the report isn't on the vial, walk away."

Short, punchy, works as a 15-second post. → /learn/lot-traceability-matching-vials-to-records

6. "Your supplier posted a COA. Cool — was it posted before they took your money, or after you complained?"

This is Arctic's actual differentiator stated as a question. Arctic publishes the report before the batch is listed and leaves old ones public. A document produced after a complaint is a response, not a record.

7. "Purity and identity are two completely different tests and you're only asking about one."

Purity comes from chromatography. Identity comes from mass spectrometry. A company that only ever shows you a purity number has answered half the question. → /learn/hplc-purity-and-mass-spectrometry-identity-explained

8. "Somebody DM'd me asking for a source. Here's what I actually told them."

Do NOT answer with a source in the video. The whole post is you explaining the checklist you'd give them — named lab, matching lot, dated before sale, verifiable. The link is the payoff at the end.

The personal angles — allowed organically, and they outperform everything

9. "What I wish I knew before my first order in this space."

Your real list. Mine would include: I didn't know COAs could be recycled across products. I didn't know I could call the lab. I didn't know the lot number mattered.

10. "I've spent a stupid amount of money in this category. This is the only thing I check now."

Confessional opener, then the four fields. Personal stakes make the educational part land.

11. "Why I stopped buying from the company with the nicest website."

The design-quality-vs-paperwork-quality gap. Every single person watching has fallen for this.

12. "Nobody talks about the side effects in this category and that's genuinely irresponsible."

You are allowed to do side-effect awareness content organically. Keep it general, keep it "be careful and go read primary literature," and do not turn it into a management protocol. This builds more trust than any promotional post you will ever make.

The meta angles — high shareability, very low risk

13. "Peptide companies don't get banned for being sketchy. They get banned for saying one specific word."

Content about the moderation environment itself. Performs unusually well, is completely safe to make, and positions you as someone who knows the terrain.

14. "This company publishes the lab report before the batch goes on sale. That's backwards from how everyone else does it — and it's the only order that means anything."

The cleanest direct Arctic post. Screen-record /batch-documentation while you talk.

15. "Reading a lab report takes thirty seconds once you know which four fields to look at."

Pure tutorial. Issuing laboratory. Test date. Method. Lot number. Evergreen, saveable, re-postable every few months.

THREE FULL SCRIPTS

Shoot vertical. Talk fast. Cut every pause. On-screen text is in [BRACKETS].

SCRIPT 1 — "The four fields" (about 35 seconds)

Best performing format in this niche. Teaches something real in under a minute.

[0:00–0:04] — talking to camera, no intro, start mid-thought

"A lab report for one of these is four pages of dense nonsense, and you only need four fields off it. I'll go fast."

[ON SCREEN 0:00–0:05: Affiliate — I earn a commission if you use my link or code.]

[0:04–0:11] — screen recording of a report, or just hold a printed page and point

"One. Issuing laboratory. Is an actual lab named on this? If nobody's named, nobody can be asked. That's not a report, that's a graphic."

[ON SCREEN: 1. WHO TESTED IT]

[0:11–0:18]

"Two. Test date. When was it run — and was that before they started selling the batch, or after somebody complained?"

[ON SCREEN: 2. WHEN]

[0:18–0:25]

"Three. Method. Every number needs a method next to it. A percentage with no method isn't a measurement, it's a claim."

[ON SCREEN: 3. HOW]

[0:25–0:33] — lean in

"Four, and this is the one nobody checks. The lot number. The number on that report has to be the number printed on the vial. Different lot is a different document. It's describing something else."

[ON SCREEN: 4. WHICH BATCH ← this one]

[0:33–0:38]

"Arctic's the only place I've seen that puts the report up before the batch goes on sale and leaves the old ones public. Link's in my bio, affiliate, I make money if you use it. Go read one yourself."

[ON SCREEN: arcticlabsupply.com/coas]

SCRIPT 2 — "I called the lab" (about 40 seconds)

Only film this if you actually did it. Made-up version is transparent and will get you cooked in the comments.

[0:00–0:06]

"I did something this week that I've never seen anyone in this space do. I took the certificate number off a COA and I emailed the lab that supposedly issued it."

[ON SCREEN 0:00–0:05: Affiliate — I earn a commission if you use my link or code.]

[0:06–0:14]

"Because that's the thing — a real report has a certificate number and a verification route. You're supposed to be able to check it. That's the entire point of a third party."

[0:14–0:24] — this is your story, tell what actually happened

"So I sent it. And what came back was [what came back]. I'm not going to name the company, but I will say I'm not ordering from them again."

[0:24–0:33]

"Here's what I do now before I spend a dollar anywhere. Find the certificate number. Take it to the issuing lab. If the lab can't confirm that number matches that product, that strength, that lot, and that date — the document is unverified. Doesn't matter how nice the PDF looks."

[ON SCREEN: NUMBER → LAB → CONFIRM]

[0:33–0:40]

"Arctic links the lab's verification page next to every report they publish, which means they expect you to check. Affiliate link's in my bio. Check theirs too. That's the whole point."

SCRIPT 3 — "What I wish I knew" (about 45 seconds)

Confessional. Lowest production requirement. Highest trust payoff.

[0:00–0:05] — walking, driving, sitting, doesn't matter

"Three things I wish somebody had told me before my first order in this space. The third one cost me actual money."

[ON SCREEN 0:00–0:05: Affiliate — I earn a commission if you use my link or code.]

[0:05–0:16]

"One. A certificate of analysis describes one sample, from one lot, on one date. That's it. It is not a statement about every vial that company has ever shipped under that name. I genuinely thought it was a product spec sheet. It isn't."

[0:16–0:28]

"Two. A high purity number doesn't tell you what the thing is. Purity is chromatography. Identity is mass spec. Two different tests. If they only ever show you the percentage, they've answered half the question and you didn't notice."

[0:28–0:40]

"Three, the expensive one. I never matched the lot on the report to the lot on the vial. Never once. I just saw 'COA available' and assumed. Same report getting reused across three different strengths and I'd have never known."

[ON SCREEN: MATCH THE LOT]

[0:40–0:46]

"I order from Arctic now because they publish per lot, before the batch goes up, and the old reports stay public. Affiliate link in my bio, I make a commission. But honestly — apply those three to whoever you're using. Most of them fail."

CAPTION TEMPLATES

Disclosure still goes in the video. These are on top of that, not instead.

Template A — educational

Four fields. That's all a lab report is.

Issuing lab → test date → method → lot number.

If the lot on the report isn't the lot on the vial, that document is
describing something else.

Affiliate link in bio — I earn a commission if you use it.
Research use only. 21+. Not for use in people or animals.

#labresearch #coa #researchchemistry #peptideresearch

Template B — story / confessional

Cost me a few hundred dollars to learn this one.

Full breakdown in the video. Short version: a COA covers one sample,
one lot, one date. It is not a product spec.

Affiliate link in bio, I earn a commission.
Research use only. 21+. Not for personal or veterinary use.

Template C — vetting / listicle

Three red flags before you order anywhere:

1. Lot number on the report doesn't appear on the label
2. One report reused across multiple products or strengths
3. No issuing laboratory named anywhere on the document

Any one of those and I'm out.

Affiliate link in bio — commission earned. Research use only, 21+.

Template D — short/punchy

Read the paperwork before you read the price.

Affiliate link in bio, I earn a commission.
Research use only · 21+ · not for use in people or animals

THE HARD LIMITS

These apply even organically. Each one has a reason, because a rule you understand is a rule you can apply to a situation I didn't anticipate.

1. No dosing. Ever. Any amount, any unit, any framing.

Not "people usually run," not "a common amount is," not a number in the comments, not in a DM, not as a joke.

Why: This is the single line that converts Arctic from a research materials supplier into something a regulator treats as directing administration or ingestion. It is the difference between a post getting removed and the company receiving a letter. Your account is recoverable. That isn't.

2. No reconstitution or handling instructions.

No mixing, no water, no syringes, no storage-for-use walkthroughs, no "here's how I prep."

Why: Same reason. Handling instructions only exist for one purpose and everyone reviewing the post knows it. Arctic deliberately keeps this off its own site — the batch-documentation page states outright that it contains no handling, preparation, or procedural guidance. Do not put on your account what the company won't put on its own site.

3. No protocols, stacks, cycles, or pairing advice.

No "this with that," no "run it for X weeks," no timing, no sequencing.

Why: A protocol is a use instruction wearing a costume. It carries every risk of dosing content with none of the deniability.

4. No medical claims. No "cures," "treats," "fixes," "heals," or any named disease or condition.

Why: These are unapproved research materials. A claim that something treats a condition is a drug claim, and a drug claim on an unapproved substance is the most serious thing in this document after dosing. It's also just false — a purity report tells you nothing about what a compound does in anyone.

5. Never show or imply that Arctic instructed anyone on use.

Don't paraphrase Arctic as telling you how to use something. Don't stitch Arctic's brand to a use-instruction video, even someone else's. Don't say "Arctic recommends."

Why: Arctic's entire legal position is that it supplies documented materials for laboratory research and instructs nobody on use. One creator video implying otherwise is evidence against the whole company, and it's the kind of thing that surfaces in exactly the worst context.

6. Disclose in the video, visibly, every time.

On screen in the first five seconds, and said out loud. Toggle alone is not disclosure. Caption alone is not disclosure.

Why: FTC requires it and platforms enforce it. It's also the cheapest possible protection — an undisclosed affiliate post is a removal waiting to happen, and it costs you nothing to say six words.

One more thing, and it's the one people forget

The comments are part of your post.

You can make a perfectly clean video and then answer "how much would someone take?" in the replies and lose the account. Moderation reads comments. Screenshots of comments travel.

When someone asks how to use it — and they will, every single time — here is your reply, copy it:

"Not something I'll get into — I only cover the documentation side. Everything I link is research use only."

Then move on. Do not get pulled into it in DMs either.

Source pages — everything in this kit comes from here

Do not invent facts about Arctic. Do not state a purity figure, a lot number, or a certificate number you have not personally read off /coas that day. Those change as new batches are published, and a number you half-remember is a false claim with your face attached to it.

← Back to the partner resource library · Questions: support@arcticlabsupply.com