Sources last read
The finding
The FDA warning letter its own drug search does not return
FDA wrote to a seller of a weight-loss patch and spelled the drug class with a T. Search FDA’s own warning-letter files for that spelling and nothing comes back. None of the 6 drug searches behind this site reaches the letter either.
Source: FDA’s published warning letters, searched 2026-08-13
What matters first
A warning letter is a public document. It is also only as findable as the words inside it, because FDA’s index reads those words rather than a drug field. This letter is the case where that gap is measurable: the product name carries a spelling nobody searches for, and the letter names no drug at all.
Everything below is either FDA’s own wording or a count anyone can repeat. We add no adjective about the company, and the only outbound links on this page go to FDA.
What FDA’s index gives back
This site runs 6 standing searches against FDA’s warning-letter index, one per drug it tracks. They return between 5 and 141 letters each. The letter on this page is in none of them.
| Search term | Letters returned | Returns this letter |
|---|---|---|
| semaglutide | 141 | No |
| tirzepatide | 109 | No |
| retatrutide | 16 | No |
| cagrilintide | 5 | No |
| glp-1 | 48 | No |
| peptide | 39 | No |
So the next question is what the index does with the spelling the letter actually uses. These searches were run for this page on 13 August 2026.
| Search term | Letters returned | Returns this letter | Why it was asked |
|---|---|---|---|
| GLT-1 | 0 | No | the drug class, spelled the way this letter spells it |
| GLT1 | 0 | No | the same spelling with the hyphen taken out |
| GLT | 0 | No | the three letters on their own, in case the hyphen was the problem |
| microneedle | 5 | Yes | what the product is, rather than what it holds |
| SMGT-GLT-1 | 1 | Yes | the product name in full, which you can only type if you have read the letter |
3 of those spellings return nothing whatever. Not this letter, and not any other: the index holds no row for them. The searches that do land are the ones you can only type once you already have the letter open, plus a search for the kind of product rather than the drug.
Open FDA’s warning-letter page, type the term into the search box above the table, and count the rows that come back. Every term below was asked that way, and through the view that page calls to fill its own table.
The name search is how this site found the letter at all. The letter spells the drug class GLT-1 rather than GLP-1. FDA’s own index returns nothing for GLT-1, so no drug search on this site or anyone else’s finds this letter. It is on the site because somebody went looking by company name, which is not a thing a reader can do before they know the company exists.
The letter, and what it says
FDA signed it on 31 March 2026 and published it on 7 April 2026. Its subject line reads Unapproved New Drugs Sold Over the Internet, and it went out from the Center for Drug Evaluation and Research (CDER). The letter names an eBay store, reviewed by FDA in December 2025.
| Column, as FDA publishes it | What it holds |
|---|---|
| Company name | FormPour |
| Product, as FDA names it | SMGT-GLT-1 Nano Microneedle Patch |
| FDA reference | MARCS-CMS 722215 |
| Letter issue date | |
| Posted date | |
| Close-out letter | None published |
An empty close-out column is not the opposite of a close-out. FDA issues one only after it has checked that a fix was made, a company has to ask for it, and FDA publishes none at all where a violation cannot be corrected.
FDA states the position in one sentence, and this is that sentence:
Based on our review, this product is an unapproved new drug under section 505(a) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act.
The rest of the letter builds that from the shop’s own words. FDA reproduces 3 lines from the listing and treats them as evidence of what the product was for. The last of them is a block of percentages:
Global User Survey Results 98.6% Type 2 Diabetes Treatment Weight Loss Aid 97.5% 98.1% Cardiovascular Protection
The letter attaches no study to those percentages. The other two lines FDA quoted are on the brand register, beside what every other patch says it holds.
2Read the search-gap analysis
Where the spelling goes wrong, counted
Open the letter and search the page yourself. Three counts come out of it, and together they are the whole reason no drug search lands here.
- The letter writes the product name 4 times, and every one of them carries the T.
- The familiar spelling turns up 1 time in the whole document, and not in a sentence: it sits inside the shop address FDA quoted, in the search words carried in that address.
- The three words a drug search would use — semaglutide, tirzepatide, peptide — appear 0 times between them. The letter names no drug at all.
That last count is the one people skip. Even a perfect index would not return this letter for a drug name, because the letter never uses one. What it describes is a sticker sold with promises about diabetes and weight, and FDA reads promises rather than ingredients when it decides whether something is a drug.
What this does to every count
FDA’s index reads the words inside each letter. A letter that spells the drug differently is invisible to a search for that drug, so every count here is a floor rather than a total.
That is not a hedge we add for safety. It is a measured property of this page, and this page is the measurement. One letter is hidden from 6 drug searches by a single character, and nobody can say how many others sit behind a typo, a trade name or a product code that no reader would ever type.
A second reason runs deeper. Plenty of shops selling these products never register with FDA, so nothing they do produces a letter to miss. Read every number in the wider warning-letter record as a floor, including the ones on that page.
Questions people actually ask
Does this letter mean the patch was dangerous?
Is this the only patch FDA has written about?
Why does the spelling matter so much?
Can I check all of this myself?
Has the company answered?
What remains unknown
Keep reading
- What each patch brand says it holds — the listings this letter sits beside, read one at a time with the date each was read.
- Whether a patch can work at all — the approval record for moving a molecule this size through skin.
- Every letter naming a seller — the same federal record, read across all six drug searches.
Sources
How we checked these details
The letter answered a live request at its own FDA address before this page shipped, and the build stops if a later refresh cannot find it in FDA’s record. It also stops if a drug search starts returning the letter, because the sentence at the top would be false the moment it does. The rest of the rules are in the editorial policy, and corrections go to contact@healthspanledger.com.