MetaGen

Editorial standards

How we research, write, and review the articles on this site.

MetaGen's articles exist to be genuinely useful to researchers. They are written to be accurate, sourced, and free of sales pitch. These are the standards every article here is held to.

Research first, sources you can check

Every substantive claim in an article links to a verifiable source: a peer-reviewed paper, a standards body, a regulatory record, or an established reference. We link to the primary source wherever one exists, so you can check a claim yourself rather than take our word for it. We never fabricate a citation or cite a source we have not read. If a statement cannot be supported, we reword it or leave it out.

Research information, not medical advice

Our articles describe what the research literature reports. They are written for a research audience and are not medical advice, a diagnosis, or a recommendation to use any compound. Where we describe trial results we describe them as trial results, not as outcomes to expect, and we state each compound's approval status plainly.

Independent and non-promotional

Articles are editorial, not marketing. They carry no product listings, no buy buttons, and no paid placements. We do not accept payment to feature or favour a compound, and we do not link to retailers, our own store included, from within an article. Where an article names a product, it does so factually.

Accuracy, review, and corrections

Every article is written and checked for accuracy before it is published. We revise articles as the evidence changes: when we make a substantive update we change the article's modified date to reflect it, rather than resurfacing old content as new.

If you spot an error, tell us and we will correct it.