Editorial Policy

How the FactoWiki Research Team researches, writes and reviews every page.

FactoWiki publishes health information, which carries a responsibility to get things right. This policy describes the standards we hold ourselves to, the sources we trust, and how we keep commercial interests from distorting what we publish.

Our core standards

Every guide is expected to be accurate, evidence-based, clearly sourced, written in plain language, and free of exaggerated health claims. When the evidence for something is strong, we say so; when it is weak, mixed or absent, we say that just as plainly. We treat "we don't know" and "the studies disagree" as legitimate, important answers rather than gaps to paper over.

How we research

For each ingredient or topic, we review the published scientific literature — including peer-reviewed studies, systematic reviews and meta-analyses — alongside reputable health authorities such as the NIH Office of Dietary Supplements, NCCIH, MedlinePlus and the FDA. We summarise what the evidence actually shows, including its limitations, and we link primary sources such as PubMed-indexed studies so readers can check them directly. We prioritise human evidence over laboratory or animal findings, and high-quality trials over small or industry-funded ones, noting funding where it is relevant.

How we handle health claims

We describe what research suggests, not what we wish it showed, and not what a manufacturer asserts. We use structure/function language — a supplement "may support" an aspect of health — and we avoid "cure," "treat," "guaranteed," "miracle" and similar terms. Supplements are presented as things that may support aspects of wellbeing, always alongside their evidence and their risks. Nothing we publish is a substitute for professional medical advice.

Sourcing and citation

We do not fabricate citations, study identifiers or ingredient amounts under any circumstances. If we cannot find reliable evidence for a claim, we either omit the claim or state clearly that the evidence is lacking. Where we reference a specific study or authority, we link it so the reader can verify it independently.

Authorship and review

Content is produced by the FactoWiki Research Team and checked by a Supplement Research Editor before publishing. We use role-based attribution rather than a single invented "expert" persona, because fabricated author identities are exactly the kind of false trust signal this site was created to counter. Each page shows when it was last reviewed and lists the categories of sources checked.

Independence from commercial interests

FactoWiki is funded partly through affiliate links, disclosed on our affiliate disclosure page. Editorial decisions are kept separate from this: a commission never determines whether a product is reviewed favourably, and we publish critical assessments of products we link to when the evidence calls for it. We do not accept payment in exchange for a positive review.

Accuracy, updates and corrections

Every page is reviewed before publishing and carries a "last updated" date. We revisit content as new evidence emerges, and prices, guarantees and availability — which sellers change frequently — are presented as snapshots to confirm on the official page. When we learn of a mistake, we fix it promptly, as described in our correction policy.

Reporting a problem

Spotted something wrong, outdated or unclear? Tell us via our contact page with the page and the specific detail, and we'll review and fix it.

Our sourcing hierarchy

Not all evidence is equal, and we weight it accordingly. We give the most weight to systematic reviews and meta-analyses of human randomised controlled trials, followed by individual well-designed human trials, then guidance from major health authorities such as the NIH and FDA. We give less weight to small, short or industry-funded studies, and least of all to laboratory or animal findings, which we treat as background rather than proof of a human benefit. Manufacturer marketing is not a source of evidence at all; it is the claim we are testing against the evidence.

Conflicts of interest

FactoWiki earns affiliate commissions, which is a commercial interest we manage by keeping it out of the editorial assessment entirely, as described in our affiliate disclosure. We do not accept free products, sponsorship or payment in exchange for coverage or a favourable tone, and we do not allow sellers to approve or edit our content. If any future relationship could reasonably be seen as a conflict, we will disclose it.

Language and accessibility

We write for a general reader, not a specialist. That means plain English, defined terms where they are unavoidable, and a structure that puts the practical answer — what something does, who should avoid it, what it costs — within easy reach rather than buried beneath marketing copy.