Medical Review Policy

Our current position, stated plainly

What we do instead

• Every health claim is traced to a public health authority resource or a peer-reviewed source before publication
• We describe study type, size and limitations rather than quoting conclusions out of context
• We never state that a supplement treats, prevents or cures a condition
• Every health, ingredient and product page carries a section on when to consult a professional
• We direct readers to pharmacists and clinicians, who are the appropriate source of individual advice

If we add a medical reviewer

Should a qualified clinician join the editorial process, we will publish their full name, their qualification, their registration or licence number with the relevant regulator, the country of registration, and the specific pages they have reviewed with the date of review. A reviewer credit without those details is decoration, and we would not publish one.

Why this matters more in health than elsewhere

Health information influences decisions that affect people’s bodies and, sometimes, whether they seek care in time. A fabricated reviewer credit does not just mislead about who wrote something — it borrows the trust people reasonably place in clinicians and spends it on content no clinician saw.

This is a live problem in the African supplement market specifically: promotional material regularly quotes named doctors who cannot be traced, and some campaigns have used real clinicians’ names without permission. Several supplier agreements we have documented explicitly prohibit naming particular doctors, which tells you the practice is widespread enough to require rules.

Individual advice

Nothing on this site is a diagnosis, a prescription or a treatment plan. For advice about your own situation, speak to a pharmacist or a qualified healthcare professional. Our guide on when to see a pharmacist explains how to make that conversation useful.