My wife and I saw Dr. Smith intermittently for about a year. I initially consulted him regarding…read morethe use of peptides for insomnia and memory issues, while my wife sought help for histamine-related symptoms. At first, I was impressed by his thorough note-taking and the amount of time he spent reviewing our histories. In that respect, he appears to provide a high-quality service
I agree with other reviewers who have criticized his prescribing practices. Even if a patient is already taking numerous supplements--which is generally inadvisable--he routinely adds more. Excessive supplementation can overwhelm the liver and other regulatory systems. A sound long-term health strategy usually emphasizes fewer supplements at lower doses. Based on my experience, he seems more focused on selling supplements from his in-house vitamin shop than on minimizing risk to the patient.
His approach could best be described as a "shotgun" method. He frequently prescribed four or five supplements or medications at once, making it impossible to determine which product is helping, which is ineffective, or which may be causing adverse reactions. In my wife's case, most of the supplements and medications either caused side effects or had no benefit at all.
More concerning was his apparent lack of interest in identifying root causes. My wife's care focused almost entirely on symptom management rather than diagnostic testing. It was only after persistent urging on my part that he agreed to order a breath test for SIBO. When the test returned positive for hydrogen-dominant SIBO, he dismissed the result outright--despite confirmation from her primary care physician and the testing company.
After several more unproductive visits, we paused treatment and pursued further evaluation independently. A colonoscopy revealed small-mouthed diverticula in the ascending colon near the ileocecal valve. These pockets can trap stool, promote bacterial overgrowth, contribute to SIBO, and potentially trigger mast cell activation. My wife's symptoms align closely with both conditions.
At our final appointment, I informed him that I had important new diagnostic information to share. Despite this, he continued prescribing additional supplements. Only near the end of the visit did he ask about the new findings. After explaining the colonoscopy results, he again denied that she had SIBO. This raised an obvious question: why were medications and supplements prescribed before meaningful diagnostic work was done? Why did I have to initiate these tests myself?
My own experience with peptides raised additional red flags. My first peptide order was shipped from a pharmacy in Phoenix, Arizona, on a day when temperatures was around 100°F. The peptide arrived two days later already reconstituted, packaged with minimal insulation and a single small ice pack. Peptides are fragile compounds that degrade easily when exposed to heat or transport stress and should never be shipped after reconstitution.
When I raised these concerns, Dr. Smith insisted the peptide would still be effective, but that is not what the science says. That shipment cost me approximately $200 in unusable product.
I later ordered a different peptide during cooler weather. This time the peptide arrived lyophilized, but it took over 14 hours at room temperature to fully dissolve--far longer than expected. After injecting, I experienced flu-like symptoms and contacted Dan Smith again. He offered no explanation for the prolonged reconstitution time, no guidance on whether the reaction was normal, and no clear dosing protocol. Despite presenting himself as an authority on peptides, he could not provide a standard epitalon protocol or explain expected side effects or indicators of efficacy.
I paid him specifically for guidance, yet was left to figure everything out myself. Ultimately, I discontinued use, resulting in another $300 lost--bringing the total cost of unusable peptides to approximately $500.
Yes -- there are a few things in this review that commonly trigger Google's moderation filters, even though the content is reasonable and factual. Google does not moderate like a human; it flags patterns.
Below is a clear breakdown of likely triggers, followed by exact fixes that usually get the review accepted without changing your meaning.
Most likely moderation triggers (ranked)
1. Medical harm / safety assertions
Phrases that imply medical danger or patient harm are frequently auto-flagged, especially when tied to a named individual.
