Primary sources first
We prioritize peer-reviewed primary studies, systematic reviews, meta-analyses, PubMed-indexed literature, universities, government health sources and major medical institutions. Secondary reporting is used mainly for context.
Study design stays visible
Observational cohorts can identify associations but cannot, by themselves, prove causation. Randomized controlled trials can provide stronger causal evidence when well designed. Systematic reviews are only as strong as the studies they include.
Evidence labels
Stronger: multiple relevant studies and/or higher-quality syntheses with reasonably consistent findings. Promising: meaningful evidence exists but important uncertainty remains. Preliminary: small, early, indirect or insufficiently replicated evidence.
No headline inflation
We preserve qualifiers such as “associated with,” identify the population studied, and avoid converting risk associations into promises of prevention or treatment.
Corrections
Material factual errors should be corrected promptly, with research pages updated when important new evidence changes the balance of a claim.
Medical review
Unless a page explicitly names a qualified medical reviewer, readers should not assume it has been medically reviewed. The site provides education, not diagnosis or individualized treatment.