1. Source selection
Every claim of mechanism, pharmacokinetics or dose-response on this Site is tied to a peer-reviewed source. We rank sources by study design, sample size, recency and publication venue. Where evidence is thin or contested, we say so.
2. Drafting
Drafts are written by a named author with documented credentials relevant to the topic. Drafts begin with the citation list; the narrative is written to match the evidence rather than the other way around.
3. Independent verification
Where the article reviews a specific supplier or compound, we independently verify a representative batch by sending a sample to an ISO-17025 accredited laboratory for HPLC purity and LC-MS identity confirmation. Results outside our 0.5% threshold against the supplier CoA disqualify the supplier from the ranking.
4. Peer review
Every article is reviewed by a second author with relevant expertise before publication. The reviewer is named on the article and signs off on the methodology, the citations and the conclusions.
5. Compliance review
Before publication, articles pass a compliance review against the site-wide standards on research-use-only framing, affiliate disclosure, and medical-advice avoidance.
6. Update cadence
Comparison articles are refreshed at least quarterly with new literature, supplier audit results and price data. Update logs document the date and reason for each substantive revision.
7. Corrections
When we get something wrong, we say so. Substantive corrections are noted at the top of the article with the date and the nature of the correction. Minor copy edits and broken-link fixes are not flagged.
Contact
Suggestions for editorial improvement and correction notices reach us at editorial@bestpeptidesforyou.com.