Editorial standards.

Our commitment

RecoveryStack exists to be the most trustworthy source of independent product reviews and protocol guidance in the recovery, longevity, and performance optimization space.

That requires standards. These are ours, in plain English.

On product reviews

We buy what we review

Every product reviewed on RecoveryStack is purchased by us at full retail price. We do not accept free product samples in exchange for reviews.

If a manufacturer offers a free unit, we do one of three things:

1. Politely decline
2. Pay them after testing to convert it to a normal purchase
3. Test it, return it, and disclose the temporary access prominently

We never publish reviews based on press-loan units that we returned without paying.

We test before we write

Minimum testing periods before publication:

We may publish first impressions earlier with a clear "First impressions" label, but never a full review.

We document with first-party media

Every product review includes:

• Multiple original photos taken by us, in our actual environment
• At least one "in use" shot
• Scale references where helpful
• Specific data we measured ourselves (temperatures, run times, energy use, etc.)

We do not use manufacturer marketing photos, stock photography, or AI-generated images as primary product visuals.

We write negative reviews

When a product doesn't deliver, we say so. We've published — and will continue to publish — reviews recommending people skip products from manufacturers we have affiliate relationships with.

If we never wrote a negative review, we wouldn't trust us either.

On health information

We are not medical professionals

RecoveryStack is written by experienced consumers and enthusiasts, not licensed medical providers. Our content is for informational purposes only. It is not medical advice.

We do not claim to:

• Diagnose any condition
• Treat any condition
• Prevent any disease
• Cure anything

Anyone considering changes to their health, exercise, supplement, or recovery routines should consult a qualified medical professional, particularly if they have an existing condition, are pregnant or nursing, or take prescription medications.

We cite peer-reviewed research

Every health claim on this site is linked to a primary source — typically PubMed, NIH, NEJM, JAMA, or a peer-reviewed journal.

When we cite a study, we read the study. Not just the abstract. Not just the press release. We summarize findings accurately, including limitations and conflicts.

We use conservative language

We say "may support," "research suggests," "users report," "evidence indicates." We never say "treats," "cures," "prevents," or "eliminates."

This is not legal hedging — it is accurate representation of what the evidence supports.

We engage medical reviewers for sensitive content

As RecoveryStack grows, sensitive health-adjacent content will be reviewed by credentialed medical professionals (MDs, RDs, DOs) before publication. Reviewer credentials are disclosed on each reviewed article.

On affiliate relationships

We disclose

Every article containing affiliate links carries a disclosure at the top stating that we may earn commissions on linked products. Our footer carries a sitewide disclosure.

This complies with FTC guidelines and our own ethics.

We do not let commissions influence verdicts

If Product A pays us 5% commission and Product B pays us 15%, but Product A is better for the reader, we recommend Product A. Full stop.

We do not write to commission rates. We do not have undisclosed agreements with manufacturers. We do not accept payment for positive coverage.

Some products on RecoveryStack are not monetized

Sometimes the right product to recommend doesn't have an affiliate program. We recommend it anyway and link to the manufacturer directly with no commission.

On updates and corrections

We update articles

Every article on RecoveryStack carries a "Last verified" date.

Update cadence:

• Major product reviews: reviewed every 6 months
• Comparison articles: refreshed quarterly
• Pillar guides: substantively updated annually, minor updates as needed
• Protocol articles: updated when underlying research changes
• News-driven articles: marked clearly and not maintained

We post corrections

When we get something wrong:

1. We fix the article
2. We add a correction note at the top: "Correction (date): We previously stated X. The correct information is Y."
3. We update the dateModified schema

We do not silently edit. We do not memory-hole errors. Mistakes get acknowledged.

On authorship

Every article has a named author

Every article on RecoveryStack carries a real human author byline. We do not publish content under pseudonyms, generic names ("RecoveryStack Staff"), or fabricated personas.

Author bios include:

• Real photo
• Background and relevant experience
• Specific products owned/tested
• Contact (LinkedIn at minimum)
• Disclosure of any conflicts of interest

AI assistance is allowed; AI authorship is not

We use AI tools for research assistance, copy editing, and outlining — same as we use Grammarly or Hemingway.

We do not publish AI-generated content as the primary draft. Every article on RecoveryStack is researched, drafted, and finalized by a human author who has used the product or developed the protocol.

On reader trust

We don't run dark-pattern affiliate placements

• No fake "scarcity" countdown timers
• No fake "X people are viewing this" widgets
• No autoplay videos
• No hidden cookie tracking beyond what's disclosed
• No clickbait headlines that don't match content

We answer reader questions

Email editorial@recoverystack.co with questions, corrections, requests, or to challenge our reviews. We read everything. We respond to most.

We accept reader feedback

If our recommendation didn't work for you, tell us. Reader feedback often makes its way into article updates.

Last reviewed · May 2026 · The full canonical version of this page lives here.