Current reviewers
None.
We have no clinical reviewers at this time. All content carries the status "source verified": checked against the cited public sources by our editorial team, and not reviewed by a licensed clinician.
We publish this page even though it is empty, because a site with no reviewers and no reviewers page leaves the question unanswered — and readers reasonably assume the more flattering answer.
What we would require of a reviewer
- A current, verifiable licence in a relevant clinical profession.
- Relevant expertise to the content reviewed.
- Willingness to be named publicly alongside the specific pages reviewed.
- Declared conflicts of interest, published on this page.
- Authority to require changes or block publication. A reviewer who cannot say no is decoration.
- Independence from advertising. No commercial input into clinical review.
- Page-level, version-specific sign-off. No site-wide badges, and substantive changes after review invalidate the label until re-reviewed.
In the meantime
What you can rely on is that every claim on this site traces to a public source you can open and check, that we state our limits rather than concealing them, and that we correct errors publicly.
What you should not rely on is this site as a substitute for a clinician. That is true of every health website, reviewed or not — but it is more true here, and we would rather say so.
Your pharmacist is a licensed medication expert, usually available without an appointment and at no charge. For questions about your own medicine, they are a better resource than any website, including this one.