How we research, write, and review.

• Peer-reviewed research first. Primary sources — journal articles, clinical trials, systematic reviews — are the foundation of every scientific claim. We cite the study, not someone else’s summary of it.
• Recognised institutions. Regulatory positions come from the FDA, EMA, and MHRA directly. Pharmacokinetic data comes from published literature, not vendor marketing.
• No tertiary references. We don’t cite other blogs, forums, or aggregator sites as evidence. Community experience is reported as community experience — clearly labelled, never dressed up as clinical evidence.
• Regulatory honesty. Products sold on this site are research chemicals, not approved pharmaceuticals. We say so, on every relevant page, without euphemism.

1. 01Written by a named author. Every article and monograph is written by Beatrisse Fender (MSci, Psychology & Neuroscience), often with Toby Sorabjee. No anonymous editorial staff, no unreviewed AI output.
2. 02Medically reviewed before publication. All clinical content — dosing, cycling, contraindications, interactions — is reviewed by Lynn Marie Morski, MD, JD, a board-certified physician, before it goes live. The “medically reviewed” date on each page records when that review last happened.
3. 03Claims are graded. We maintain an internal claims matrix that classifies every statement on the site by evidence strength and regulatory risk. High-risk claims are removed or rewritten, not softened with adjectives.
4. 04Updated as the evidence moves. Regulatory decisions (like the FDA PCAC review) and new trial data trigger page updates. Each page shows when it was last reviewed, so you can judge currency yourself.

We publish corrections visibly and quickly. If you spot an error — a misstated dose, an outdated regulatory position, a broken citation — email [email protected] with the page URL and what you believe is wrong. A clinician reviews every correction request. If we’re wrong, the page changes and the review date moves.