How We Review

This page documents the verification protocol every TotalHealth Research Desk product review and ingredient deep-dive goes through before it publishes. We publish this methodology openly so readers can evaluate our work the same way we evaluate the products we cover.

Why We Have a Documented Protocol

The supplement category — and the broader wellness category for women in midlife — is dense with marketing that outruns its underlying evidence. Generic “studies show” phrasing, percentage claims without sources, “clinically proven” language attached to ingredients rather than to actual finished products, and ingredient lists that differ between marketing copy and the Supplement Facts panel are common. A documented verification protocol is how we keep our coverage tethered to what is actually verifiable.

Step 1 — Brand and Product Source Audit

Every review starts by going directly to the brand's official website. We fetch the product page and extract the following:

• The full product name and any product line variations.
• The complete published ingredient list, including active ingredients, inactive ingredients, and “other ingredients.”
• The published Supplement Facts panel (for dietary supplements) or Nutrition Facts panel where applicable.
• All pricing tiers, including subscription discounts, multi-bottle discounts, and any hidden fees.
• The refund or money-back guarantee policy, with exact terms.
• Contact information and customer service channels.
• Stated certifications (NSF, USP, Informed Choice, GMP, organic, non-GMO, etc.).
• Third-party testing claims.

If a piece of information that a reader would reasonably expect to find (refund policy, ingredient list, third-party testing) is not on the brand's website, we flag that gap explicitly in the review.

Step 2 — Label vs. Marketing Discrepancy Check

This is the step most generic supplement reviews skip. We compare the brand's marketing ingredient claims against the published Supplement Facts panel side by side. When the marketing copy and the label disagree — for example, when a brand's hero ingredient is named prominently in marketing but appears in trace amounts on the panel, or when a “proprietary blend” obscures the per-ingredient dose — we report what is on the panel, not what is in the marketing copy.

We write only to the verified Supplement Facts panel. Marketing copy ingredient claims that are not on the panel cannot be reproduced as fact. Where there is a meaningful discrepancy, we name it in the review.

Step 3 — Third-Party Testing Verification

When a brand claims third-party testing — NSF, USP, Informed Choice, ConsumerLab, Labdoor, or another certifying body — we attempt to verify that claim against the testing organization's published records. If we can confirm the certification, we say so and link the verification. If we cannot confirm it, or if the brand claims testing without naming the organization, we say so.

Step 4 — Research Citation Standards

When we cite research, we cite by named author, year, and journal — at minimum, “[First author] et al., [year], [journal name].” We do not write “studies show,” “research suggests,” or “clinical research indicates” without naming the studies. If a study cannot be located on PubMed, in a peer-reviewed journal, or in another verifiable source, we cannot cite it.

We distinguish between:

• Established research: Multiple human randomized controlled trials, meta-analyses, or systematic reviews supporting a finding.
• Preliminary research: Small pilot studies, single trials without replication, or trials with significant methodological limitations.
• Animal research: Findings from animal models that have not yet been demonstrated in humans.
• In vitro research: Findings from cell-culture or lab studies that have not been demonstrated in animals or humans.
• Marketing claims: Manufacturer assertions that may or may not be backed by published research. We treat these as claims to be verified, not as evidence.

Distinguishing among these categories is a routine part of how we write. We will not present a single small pilot study as if it were established science.

Step 5 — DSHEA Compliance Framework

For dietary supplements, our editorial framework follows the Dietary Supplement Health and Education Act (DSHEA). We use structure-function language only:

• “May support healthy cholesterol levels already within the normal range.”
• “Is associated with improved sleep quality in clinical trials.”
• “Research suggests it may support cognitive function during perimenopause.”

We do not use disease claim language for supplements:

• We do not say a supplement “treats,” “cures,” or “prevents” any disease.
• We do not say a supplement is “FDA-approved” (dietary supplements are not FDA-approved as a category).
• We do not say a supplement “diagnoses” any condition.

Every supplement-related article includes the FDA evaluation statement: “These statements have not been evaluated by the Food and Drug Administration. This product is not intended to diagnose, treat, cure, or prevent any disease.”

Step 6 — Telehealth and Compounded Medication Standards

When we cover telehealth platforms or content that touches compounded medications (compounded testosterone, compounded GLP-1 preparations such as semaglutide and tirzepatide, compounded PDE5 inhibitors, peptide preparations), we apply additional standards:

• We disclose the three-entity structure of telehealth services: the telehealth platform, the prescribing entity, and the dispensing pharmacy are identified as distinct.
• We include the compounded-medication disclaimer in the body of the article, not just in the footer.
• We are explicit that compounded medications are not FDA-approved finished drug products and are not subject to the same pre-market safety, efficacy, and quality review as commercially manufactured FDA-approved drugs.
• We do not characterize compounded medications as “the same as” their FDA-approved counterparts. The compounded versions are produced by 503A compounding pharmacies under a different regulatory framework.

Step 7 — Pricing Verification

Pricing changes frequently. Every product review documents the pricing at the time of verification, with the verification date stated explicitly. We re-verify pricing on product-focused pages every 6 to 12 months, and on telehealth platform pages quarterly. If pricing changes materially between verifications, we update the article and note the update date. We do not publish unverified pricing.

Step 8 — Affiliate Relationship Disclosure

Every article that contains a paid link discloses that relationship at the top of the article, above the first paid link, using “paid link” language as required by FTC 16 CFR Part 255. Our full affiliate relationship policy — including how commissions are structured, what they do and do not influence, and how to contact us about a disclosure concern — is on our Research & Disclosure Standards page.

Step 9 — Editorial Independence

Brands cannot pay to be reviewed. Brands cannot pay to be reviewed favorably. Brands cannot pay to be excluded from a comparison. The presence or absence of an affiliate program does not determine whether a product appears in our coverage. When a product we cover does not have an affiliate program, we say so and link to the brand's direct site.

Our conclusions are the editorial team's, based on the verification protocol above. If a brand's product does not survive the verification protocol, the brand cannot buy a favorable review by joining an affiliate program. This is not a policy we negotiate.

Step 10 — Corrections Policy

If you identify a factual error in a TotalHealth Research Desk article, please send us the correction with a source via our contact form. We review every correction request. Corrections are issued at the top of the affected article, with the original error noted and the correction date posted. We do not silently edit articles to fix factual errors — corrections are transparent.

Categories of corrections we issue: factual errors in research citations, errors in pricing or refund policy details, errors in ingredient lists or Supplement Facts panel reporting, errors in regulatory status descriptions, and errors in brand or product attribution. Editorial opinion is not corrected — if you disagree with a conclusion, we welcome the feedback but the conclusion stands unless the underlying facts were wrong.

Step 11 — Content Currency

The supplement, telehealth, and wellness categories change. Regulatory status changes. Brand formulations change. Pricing changes. Research evolves. Every TotalHealth Research Desk article includes a “Last verified” date that reflects an actual re-verification, not a cosmetic date update. When we refresh an article, we re-run the verification protocol on the elements that may have changed: pricing, refund policy, formulation, third-party testing status, and regulatory framework.

Cosmetic date changes — where the publish date is updated without the article being re-verified — are not the standard at this publication. If you see a “Last verified” date on an article, it reflects an actual verification on that date.

What We Will Not Do

• We will not invent studies, ingredients, statistics, customer outcomes, or physician endorsements.
• We will not cite research that cannot be located in a verifiable source.
• We will not present a single small pilot study as if it were established science.
• We will not reproduce marketing ingredient claims that are not on the Supplement Facts panel.
• We will not use disease-claim language for supplements under any circumstances.
• We will not claim FDA approval for a product that is not FDA-approved.
• We will not omit an evidence gap to make a product sound better-supported than it is.
• We will not let an affiliate relationship change a conclusion.

---

Some links on this site are paid links. If you purchase through them, TotalHealthRD.com may earn a commission at no additional cost to you. This does not influence our research or conclusions. See our Research & Disclosure Standards for full details.