HIGH-STAKES INFORMATION
Science and Medical Content Policy
Science and health stories require special care because uncertainty can be misunderstood and inaccurate information can cause real harm.
Evidence standards
We prioritise systematic reviews, recognised clinical guidance, public-health agencies and peer-reviewed primary research. A single study rarely establishes a medical conclusion. We explain when evidence is observational, preliminary, based on animals or laboratory models, or limited to a narrow population.
Risk, benefit and uncertainty
Coverage should describe meaningful benefits, known risks, limitations and credible alternatives in proportion to the evidence. Relative risk figures should be accompanied by absolute context when available. Correlation is not described as causation without adequate evidence.
Review and updates
Consequential medical and health claims should receive enhanced editorial review and, when appropriate, review by a contributor with relevant expertise. Fast-changing guidance is dated and reviewed periodically.
What we prohibit
We do not publish unsupported cures, guaranteed outcomes, instructions to disregard qualified care, or fear-based claims designed to drive attention. Personal anecdotes may illustrate an experience but do not replace evidence.
Research involving people and animals
Stories should identify meaningful ethical questions, avoid dehumanising language and provide appropriate context for animal or human research. Sensitive imagery is used only when it materially improves understanding.