Review selection policy
Products may be selected because a claim is popular, contested, safety-relevant, regulatory-sensitive, or requested by readers. Brand interest does not guarantee coverage or a favorable verdict.
Editorial Standards v1.0 · published May 2026
The rules behind the evidence desk
Independence is not a slogan. These standards define how products are selected, how conflicts are handled, when grades change, and how corrections are issued.
Commercial firewall
Evidence grade, safety status, verdict, and uncertainty language are produced independently from any affiliate, sponsorship, sample, or future subscription revenue. A product is reviewable whether or not a commercial relationship exists.
Conflicts policy
Known sponsor, affiliate, sample, author, or source conflicts should be disclosed near the affected dossier. Missing disclosures should be corrected publicly when identified.
Corrections policy
Corrections are part of the method. Material corrections should state what changed, why it changed, the review date, and whether the grade or safety status moved.
Update policy
Dossiers should show date first published, date last reviewed, current methodology version, source count, reviewer type, and grade history when applicable.
Commercial links label
If introduced, purchase modules must appear below the verdict and be labelled: “Commercial links — independent of the evidence grade above.”