Editorial Policy
How The Iron Verdict researches, writes, reviews and updates every piece of content — and the standards we hold ourselves to when we tell you what works and what doesn't.
Who writes this site
The Iron Verdict is written and edited by Nuno Pacheco, a certified fitness professional (TEEF/CET qualification, Fitness Academy) with 424 supervised hours completed in a commercial gym environment.
We are not physicians, dietitians or pharmacists. Where a topic requires clinical judgement — prescription medication, medical conditions, drug interactions — we say so and point readers to a qualified professional rather than answering ourselves.
Independence
Our recommendations are not for sale. We earn affiliate commissions when readers buy through our links, but a commission never changes a ranking, a score or a verdict. We routinely recommend the cheaper option, the generic over the branded product, and "save your money" when the evidence doesn't justify a purchase. No brand pays for placement, reviews are never sent for pre-approval, and sponsored content is not published as editorial. When a manufacturer sends a product for testing, that fact is disclosed on the page and does not earn favourable treatment.
Research Standards
Every health, supplement and training claim is traced back to primary sources — peer-reviewed human trials, systematic reviews and meta-analyses — not press releases or influencer summaries. We weight evidence by quality: randomised controlled trials and meta-analyses outrank observational studies, which outrank animal or in-vitro data, which outrank anecdote. We state effect sizes and dosages, flag where evidence is weak or preliminary, and distinguish clearly between what is proven, what is plausible and what is marketing. Where the science is genuinely unsettled, we say so rather than manufacture false certainty.
Product Testing
Product rankings combine verifiable specifications, published research and, where applicable, direct hands-on use. We state explicitly on each review whether a product was used directly or assessed from documentation, owner reports and manufacturer specifications. We do not describe a product as tested when it has not been tested. We assess ingredient quality and dosing against clinically studied ranges, third-party purity testing, value per effective dose, and real-world usability. Equipment and wearables are used over multiple weeks before a verdict is published. We prioritise products that do what they claim at a fair price over those that simply spend the most on marketing.
Health content and medical claims
Nothing on this site is medical advice. We do not diagnose, treat or prescribe. Content covering prescription medication — including GLP-1 receptor agonists — is informational, describes mechanisms and published evidence, and directs readers to licensed clinicians for anything requiring a prescription or individual assessment.
We do not publish before-and-after transformation claims, guaranteed outcomes, or weight-loss figures presented as typical. Individual results vary, and treatment is not appropriate for everyone.
If you are experiencing a medical emergency, contact your local emergency services.
Corrections
We get things wrong sometimes, and when we do we fix them openly. If you spot a factual error, a broken link, a price that's out of date or a claim that no longer matches the evidence, email us via the contact page. Substantive corrections are made promptly and, where they materially change a conclusion, noted on the page so readers know what changed and when.
Updates
Supplement science and product line-ups change, so our content is not "publish and forget". Buying guides and product rankings are reviewed on a recurring schedule and whenever significant new research, reformulations or discontinuations warrant it. Each guide reflects the best available evidence and current product availability at the time of its most recent review.