Health information should make uncertainty easier to see, not easier to sell. These standards govern every guide, evidence profile, and regulatory update on PeptideInfo.ca.
1. Canadian status is product-specific
We do not describe a peptide as simply “legal” or “illegal” without context. Canadian authorization can depend on the exact ingredient, finished product, manufacturer, dose form, route, indication, and activity being discussed. When an authorized product exists, that does not authorize every version sold under the same ingredient name.
2. Evidence levels stay separate
We distinguish laboratory, animal, observational human, randomized human, and systematic-review evidence. Mechanisms and early findings are described as hypotheses or research findings – not as treatment outcomes. We state important limitations and unknowns.
3. Primary sources come first
Canadian status articles prioritize Health Canada databases, advisories, legislation, and official product monographs. Research summaries prioritize peer-reviewed papers, trial registries, systematic reviews, and regulator documents. Vendor pages, social posts, and promotional summaries are not evidence.
4. Review labels mean exactly what they say
- Sources checked – no clinician review: the cited source and wording were checked editorially, but no licensed clinician reviewed the article.
- Expert reviewed: a named reviewer with relevant, verifiable qualifications personally reviewed the article. Their role and review date will appear on the page.
- Canadian status checked: the relevant Health Canada source was checked on the stated date. Status can change after that date.
5. Independence is visible
We do not sell, prescribe, source, compound, or arrange access to peptides. We do not publish vendor rankings, buying links, discount codes, dosing protocols, stacking guides, reconstitution steps, injection instructions, or product testimonials. At launch we accept no commercial sponsorship.
6. AI use is disclosed
Automated tools may assist with outlining, transcription, research organization, or copy editing. Factual claims must still be checked against the sources shown. We will not invent authors, reviewers, patient stories, quotations, or credentials.
7. Corrections are part of the record
Readers can report a possible error through our corrections page. Material changes are noted on the article. Quiet typographical fixes may not receive a correction note unless they change meaning.
8. Medical boundaries stay clear
Our content is general education. We do not answer personal treatment questions, interpret laboratory results, or tell a reader to start, stop, change, or seek a particular medication. Emergencies and adverse events belong with appropriate healthcare and public-safety channels.
Source hierarchy
9. House style is part of accuracy
PeptideInfo.ca does not use em dashes. Writers use a period, comma, colon, parentheses, or a carefully placed hyphen instead. This rule applies to headlines, articles, summaries, source labels, and interface copy. Automated publishing checks reject the prohibited character before a release is packaged.
10. News reporting stays separate from promotion
Regulatory and research updates begin with a dated event, identify the agency or study responsible, and link the original record. We distinguish reported fact from editorial interpretation. We do not turn warnings into alarmist headlines, and we do not turn early research into treatment promotion. Named compounds may be covered when they are part of the public record, but coverage never includes dosing, sourcing, purchasing instructions, vendor rankings, or clinic conversion links.