Research

What the documents actually say.

Two things get written here. One is an investigation, run over the seller record this site maintains, into a question the market would rather leave vague. The other is a close reading of the trial literature on a specific drug or risk. Neither is a news summary, and neither goes out with a number we could not trace to the document it came from.

Research formats

Top-N PubMed lists
Ranked study reading lists
Ten papers per topic, each with its identifier and a short note on what it actually found.
By topic
Grouped by the question, not the date
Four questions the library answers: what compounding is allowed to be, how to check a seller, what it costs and who pays, and what the safety labels actually say.
Cheat sheets
Dose ladders, missed doses, red flags
Reference cards sized for a phone. Each dose figure comes off the DailyMed label, not off a seller.
Drug-vs-drug verdicts
Head-to-head comparisons
Two drugs, side by side, anchored to what their trials measured rather than to what either maker says.
Trial deep-dives
Every secondary endpoint decoded
One pivotal trial at a time, worked through in order: the primary endpoint, every secondary, and the adverse-event rates.

How we work

A figure in an investigation was read off the seller’s own page on a recorded date. A clinical statement traces to PubMed, an FDA document, or the trial paper itself, and never to a press release, a listicle or another comparison site. Where two sources disagree we say so on the page instead of picking the tidier one. An article gets revisited when the evidence under it moves, though we will not pretend that happens the instant a study lands.

Nothing here is a recommendation to take a particular drug, and none of it can weigh your history the way a clinician can. Take the decision to one. How we rate sellers →