Why trust us

1. Independence is built into the process

Our reviewers score every provider against a published 31-point rubric, and no provider pays us anything: as of July 2026 the site carries no ads, no affiliate links, and no sponsorships. The score is locked, in writing, on the evidence alone, which is why an unscored provider on this site shows "review in progress" rather than a number. Read our editorial independence page and our editorial pledge.

2. Radical sourcing transparency

Every medical-claim article carries a numbered source list: the actual trials (not the company's summary of them), FDA prescribing information, and our aggregated review analysis with the sample size and collection date. Where a key study was industry-funded, we say so inline. If we can't source a claim, we don't publish it.

3. A hard editorial line: reporting, not guidance

We do not have a clinician on staff, so we never publish medical guidance: no dosing instructions, no symptom-management advice, no safety how-tos. What we publish is evidence reporting, meaning what the trials, FDA labels, and aggregated patient reports show, with the primary source cited inline. Drafts that crossed that line stay unpublished under this policy. Nothing on this site replaces your own clinician.

What we are, and aren't

We're an analysis site. We read the published research and aggregate real patient reports from online communities and review platforms. Every sample size we cite is counted, dated, and traceable to a stored dataset. We do not personally test medical products, and we don't pretend to. We're published as a team rather than a personal brand, and when we get something wrong, it goes on the public corrections log.