Oak review

This company makes this site's argument for it, in its own words, on its own homepage: one price, all dosages, all doses the same price. Read as marketing that is reassurance — nobody wants to watch the bill climb as they titrate upward. Read by somebody who intends to stay deliberately small, it is the whole problem in a sentence, because a starter dose and a top-of-range dose are billed identically and there is no low-dose or microdose product here to move to instead. Which brings up the second thing, and it is the one that decides whether you can act on any of this. We used to say here that no purchasable ladder existed outside a twenty-nine-question intake we had refused to fill in. The refusal stands — putting a reader's health information into a company's intake to find out what it charges is not something we will do on anybody's behalf — but it never cost us the price, because the price was never behind the questionnaire. Both compounded rungs sit on the first screen of the order form with nothing filled in. What it does instead is charge more than anything it advertises, and change what it charges: read twice on one day, the whole grid had moved upward by the afternoon. What is on the public pages meanwhile is nine different advertised starting figures, live at the same time, spread across the homepage, the FAQ, a comparison table, an affiliate page and an employer page, with no term and no billing cadence attached to a single one of them. The two cheapest are the ones most often quoted elsewhere, and they are not monthly rates: they appear only beside a new-patient discount that the company's own affiliate page describes as money off a three-month package. Its own undiscounted floors are higher, and they are also on its own pages. The last thing worth knowing is where the marketing and the contract disagree. Three marketing pages state that there are no membership fees and no subscriptions. The Terms say that patients are charged a membership fee for a provider consult, and that most prescriptions are configured as a subscription renewing on a recurring basis. Both of those documents belong to the company. Only one of them is the one you would be bound by.

Vs median

$81/mo above the $169 median across the 242 of 373 programs we track that publish a plain monthly rate

Market

$59–$1300/mo is the full published spread in our ranking

Structure

No low-dose price published

Consult

Billed separately

Dietitian

Not included

Labs

Not required

Pricing

Varies by dose, plan or tier

Price last updated

August 2026

Oak does not publicly identify the pharmacy that fills its prescriptions. No bloodwork is required before you start. A clinician review is billed separately.

Oak (oaklovesyou.com) is a cash-pay longevity and weight-loss telehealth brand running a marketing site in front of a hosted intake funnel and a separate patient portal. It sells three weight-loss lines — compounded tirzepatide injection, compounded semaglutide injection, and a non-injectable line of sublingual drops or tablets — with an oral tirzepatide program itemised separately on its employer page. Its central pricing claim is its own and it is stated plainly on the homepage: one price, all dosages, all doses the same price. What it does not do is charge any of the figures it advertises. Its order form prices both compounded molecules on its first screen, before a single question is answered — and read twice on 15 August 2026 it moved upward between the two readings, with the discount strike-throughs gone by the afternoon. The nine "starting" figures scattered across the marketing pages carry no term and no billing cadence between them, and none of them is what the form charges. No dispensing pharmacy is named, no prescriber is named, and no list of states is published. The operating entity is not consistent across its own documents either — the Terms header, the Terms body, a second Terms block and the Privacy policy name three different companies between them. Note also where a click lands: this program's link arrives mid-funnel, at step one of five, on an Oak-versus-competitors comparison table rather than on the homepage, so a reader sees Oak's pricing claim set against named rivals before they see Oak's own site.

The flat-price finding here is Oak's own marketing rather than our inference: "One price · All dosages" and "All doses are the same price". Billed that way, someone holding at a starter dose pays exactly what someone at the top of the range pays — and Oak publishes no low-dose or microdose product to move to instead

• The price you will pay is not the price it advertises, and it does not hold still. Its order form prices both compounded molecules on its first screen before a single question is answered — but that form read $50 lower on both lines the same morning we read it, with every brand-name line $100 lower too, so whatever it quotes you should be checked again before you pay
• Nine different "starting" figures are live on the site simultaneously — $119/$185, $133/$199, $167, $190, and $160/$180/$250 — and not one page attaches a term or a billing cadence to any of them
• The cheapest figures it advertises are not a monthly rate. $119 and $185 appear only beside "$200 off — new patient offer", and Oak's own affiliate page states the structure as "$50 off your first month, $200 off 3-months" — a three-month package discount. Its own undiscounted floors are $190/month and $167/mo
• Its marketing and its Terms contradict each other on the two things a buyer most needs settled. Three marketing pages say "Membership Fees: None" and "No subscriptions"; the Terms say that "patients are charged a membership fee for a Provider consult" and that "most of these prescriptions are configured as a subscription that will renew on a recurring basis"
• No dispensing pharmacy is named anywhere — only "Oak's contracted pharmacies" — and no prescriber is named either, beyond "independent licensed physicians and nurse practitioners contracted through Oak's medical group partners"
• No list of the states it serves is published; its own consent text says only "if/when permitted by state law"
• The operating entity differs across its own documents: the Terms header names Oak Longevity Holdings Corp, the Terms body names Leaf Longevity Holdings Corp. DBA Oak Longevity, a second Terms block names OAKLOVESYOU LLC, and the Privacy policy names Leaf Longevity Holdings Corp with a listed country of Canada
• Billing cadence and any minimum term are unpublished — the Terms say only that packages "contain several weeks' worth of product" — and withdrawing consent after a prescription has been transmitted to a pharmacy does not cancel or reverse it
• Compounded GLP-1s are not FDA-approved and are not generic equivalents of the brand drugs, and intentional microdosing is off-label and unproven — moot here in any case, because Oak publishes no microdose product

Oak is one of 373 low-dose GLP-1 programs we track, and 242 of them publish a monthly rate you can read before signing up. The ranking lists every published price on one screen, ordered with the companies that pay us first — a mechanism we state there, on the page it applies to.

Intentional GLP-1 microdosing is off-label and unproven — no randomized trial has established that a sub-label dose does anything, and any dose belongs with a clinician who knows your history. If you are going to have that conversation, have it with real numbers.

• What the evidence actually shows
• What microdosing GLP-1 costs
• Low dose vs full dose
• Microdose & reconstitution calculator
• What a flat price costs at a low dose