Editorial Policy

Our Standards

Placeholder: We hold every piece of content on this site to a strict set of editorial standards. Claims must be traceable to a source — either peer-reviewed research, official regulatory guidance, or clearly flagged community reporting. We never publish speculative content without labeling it as such.

Placeholder: Opinion is always distinguished from fact. When something is our interpretation of the available evidence, we say so. When the evidence is weak, thin, or conflicting, we say that too. We would rather publish a shorter, honest article than a long one padded with unverified claims.

Levels of Evidence

Placeholder: We classify every factual claim according to its evidence level — human clinical trials, animal studies, in-vitro research, or community-reported anecdote. Each level is clearly labeled so readers can weigh the information appropriately.

Research Process

Placeholder: Before any guide or review is written, we conduct a structured literature review using PubMed, Google Scholar, and other scientific databases. We prioritize systematic reviews and meta-analyses, followed by randomized controlled trials, then observational studies, then animal and in-vitro data.

Placeholder: For vendor reviews, our process includes ordering products, reviewing Certificates of Analysis, monitoring long-term community sentiment across forums and social channels, and assessing business practices such as shipping reliability and customer support. This process takes months, not days.

Primary Sources Only

Placeholder: We read primary research papers, not just abstracts or secondary summaries. Where a secondary source is used, it is disclosed. We do not cite other biohacking blogs or marketing materials as sources of fact.

Conflict of Interest Disclosure

Placeholder: Any potential conflict of interest — including affiliate relationships, free product samples, or paid partnerships — is disclosed prominently on every relevant page. Affiliate revenue never influences editorial recommendations.

Fact-Checking

Placeholder: Every factual claim in our articles is reviewed before publication. Citations are verified to confirm they actually support the claim made. We do not rely on abstracts alone — the full text of studies is reviewed whenever accessible.

Placeholder: When a claim cannot be directly verified from a trustworthy primary source, it is either removed, clearly labeled as community-reported, or flagged with a note that evidence is insufficient. We set a high bar and would rather say less than overstate.

Review Cycle

Placeholder: Core content pages are reviewed on a regular cycle to ensure they remain current with the latest published research. When new studies are published that materially affect a topic, we update the relevant pages promptly and note the revision date at the bottom of each article.

Corrections Policy

Placeholder: We take corrections seriously. If we publish something that is factually wrong, we correct it promptly and transparently. Corrections are noted at the top or bottom of the affected article with a brief explanation of what changed and why.

Placeholder: We do not silently delete or rewrite content to hide errors. If a material change is made to an article, the revision history is noted. Readers who spot errors or have questions about our sourcing are encouraged to contact us — we treat every correction request as a genuine opportunity to improve.

How to Report an Error

Placeholder: If you believe something on this site is inaccurate, please use our contact page to let us know. Include the article URL, the specific claim in question, and any sources that support a correction. We will review every submission and respond.