Editorial Policy

Two publication paths

Medical articles follow one of two documented paths. clinical review (qualified independent clinician review with named reviewer and date) or editorial verification (evidence-based fact-check against CDC, NIH, FDA, and MedlinePlus sources, plus safety assessment and explicit owner approval, with NO clinical review claimed). Only approved → published articles appear on the public site; drafts are blocked at build time.

High-risk clinical content, diagnosis, treatment regimens and dosages, pregnancy care specifics, emergency guidance such as PEP, and any article with unresolved medical claims, can only publish via the clinical-review path. See the review process for the full two-path workflow.

Sourcing standards

We attribute medically significant claims to reliable sources (CDC, FDA, NIH, MedlinePlus, peer-reviewed research, US clinical guidance), distinguish established evidence from uncertainty, and never promise diagnoses or cures. Key references are listed on every article so readers can verify claims themselves.

What we never publish

We publish no product selling, lead-generation funnels, testimonials, or fabricated credentials. Sponsored testing-service placements do appear on the site: they are always labeled “Advertisement,” carry sponsored link attributes, and never influence educational content. Author identities are real people only (see Authors), and clinical reviewers are listed with verified credentials only (see Medical Review Board). Placeholders are shown openly until the owner confirms real details.

Corrections

Errors are corrected transparently under our corrections policy. Readers can report a suspected error through the contact page; time-sensitive medical corrections take priority over all other editorial work.