─ Editorial Standards
Content
Integrity
How we research, write, verify, and update content — and why editorial independence is the foundation of everything we publish.
Every article on Cliff Mad Honey Index is written to one standard: it must be accurate enough that a toxicologist, a healthcare provider, or a worried consumer could rely on it to make a real decision.
01
We cite primary sources, not secondary ones
Every factual claim traces back to a peer-reviewed journal, a government health authority, or a primary clinical source. We don't cite Wikipedia, other content websites, or vendor materials. If a claim can't be sourced to primary literature, we don't make it.
02
We distinguish evidence grades clearly
We signal the strength of evidence behind every major claim. "Established science" (multiple peer-reviewed studies), "emerging evidence" (limited studies, preliminary findings), and "informed opinion" (reasoned position where direct evidence is limited) are treated differently in our writing.
03
No commercial relationships influence content
We have no affiliate agreements with honey sellers. We receive no payment from producers for coverage, listings, or recommendations. Our safety classifications and editorial positions are determined entirely by evidence. If a producer's product appears in our content, it is because the science warranted the reference — not because of any commercial arrangement.
04
We acknowledge uncertainty honestly
Mad honey science has gaps. Grayanotoxin pharmacokinetics in humans are not fully characterised. Long-term effects at sub-toxic doses are understudied. When the evidence is incomplete or conflicting, we say so explicitly — rather than filling gaps with speculation or optimistic assumptions.
05
Content is reviewed and updated
As new research is published, we update our articles. Each page displays its last-updated date. Articles addressing safety-critical information (dosage, contraindications, clinical management) are reviewed on a scheduled basis regardless of whether new literature has emerged.
06
Corrections are transparent
If we publish an error, we correct it and note the correction at the bottom of the article with a date. We do not silently edit factual errors without acknowledgement. Our credibility depends on readers being able to trust the revision history of our content.
A note on AI-assisted writing: Some of our content is drafted with AI assistance and then verified, edited, and approved by human editors against primary sources. No AI-generated content is published without human review. Source citations are checked manually. We do not publish AI outputs that have not been verified.
