Editorial policy: how we research and check every page

Which sources do we use?

In order of preference:

1. Randomised, placebo-controlled trials in people, and systematic reviews of them.
2. Other human studies, such as trials without a placebo group, clearly labelled as weaker.
3. Animal and cell studies, only to explain why researchers are interested in something, and never as evidence that it works in people.
4. For legal and safety questions, UK legislation, the Food Standards Agency, the NHS, the MHRA and other official bodies.

We do not use supplement company websites, press releases or marketing material as sources for health claims.

How do we grade the evidence?

Each health claim gets one of four grades, from strong to no human evidence, according to the number, size and quality of the human trials behind it. The grading method is published so you can check our reasoning.

How do we handle funding and conflicts of interest?

Many lion’s mane studies are funded by, or use products from, companies that sell it. That does not make them wrong, but it matters, so we say so when we describe them. The site itself takes no money from supplement companies (see about us).

Do we use AI?

Yes, as a research and drafting aid. AI tools help us search the literature and draft pages. Every page is then checked against the sources it cites: each number, dose and result is compared with the original study before the page is published. We never publish a claim we could not trace to a source.

How do we keep pages up to date?

Each page shows the date it was last updated. We review health pages at least once a year, and sooner when an important new study is published. New trials are added to the trials table when they appear.

What happens when we get something wrong?

We fix it, change the updated date, and add a short note at the end of the page saying what changed when the correction affects the meaning. To report an error, email hello@lionsmanemushroom.uk with a link to the evidence.