Independence
Last updated
Independence is a set of specific, checkable commitments, not an adjective.
The commitments
No brand sees an analysis before publication. Manufacturers are not offered advance review, right of reply prior to publication, or a chance to correct an assessment before readers see it.
No brand relationship influences selection. Products are chosen on what their formulation raises, not on who is willing to cooperate.
Negative findings are published. An analysis that concludes a product is poorly formulated, or that its central claim cannot be checked, is published on the same terms as a favourable one.
Sources are published, not summarised. Every ingredient list links to the manufacturer page it was transcribed from, with an access date, so a reader can check the work rather than take it on trust.
Declared conflicts
None at the time of writing.
Any financial interest, consulting relationship, speaking fee or shareholding involving a brand analysed here would be declared on this page and in the affected analysis itself.
Clinical independence
Analyses are written and reviewed by a practising dermatologist. Where a clinical opinion appears, it reflects the author’s own assessment and is not a consensus position, a guideline, or advice for an individual patient.
Where evidence is genuinely contested, the analysis says that rather than picking a side for readability.
What independence does not mean
It does not mean neutrality between a claim and the evidence. Where an ingredient list cannot support a marketing claim, saying so plainly is accuracy, not bias.