Editorial Policy
GLP-1 Healthcare exists to give people clear, accurate, independent information about GLP-1 medications before and during treatment. This policy explains how we produce that information, where it comes from, who checks it, and the standards we hold every page to.
Last updated 2026-07-24 · This is a living document; material changes are logged.
Our medical-review status, stated plainly
We are an independent publisher, and we are actively recruiting credentialed clinical reviewers (physicians, pharmacists, and registered dietitians). Read the byline to know where a page stands: a page reviewed by a named, credentialed clinician displays that person’s real name, credentials, and review date. A page that carries only our “Evidence-sourced” mark has been written and fact-checked to the standards on this page, with every clinical claim traced to a named primary authority — but has not been signed off by a clinician. We never attach a reviewer’s name to work they did not review, and we never invent experts. If you are a qualified clinician interested in reviewing, we’d like to hear from you.
1. Our mission and who we serve
We write for people considering, starting, or already taking a GLP-1 medication such as semaglutide or tirzepatide, and for the family members helping them. Our job is to make a confusing, fast-moving, and often expensive area understandable — without selling a product. GLP-1 Healthcare is independently operated and is not owned by, affiliated with, or funded by any pharmaceutical manufacturer, telehealth prescriber, or pharmacy.
2. How we weigh evidence
Not all sources deserve equal trust. We follow a strict evidence hierarchy, and we cite the strongest source available for every factual claim. In order of authority:
- Regulatory & government sources — the FDA, the official drug labels on DailyMed, NIH institutes, the CDC, and Medicare/CMS for coverage.
- Professional-society guidelines — consensus clinical guidance from bodies such as the American Diabetes Association, the Endocrine Society, and the Obesity Medicine Association.
- Peer-reviewed literature and clinical trials — primary studies in journals such as NEJM, JAMA, and The Lancet, and the trial registry ClinicalTrials.gov.
- Manufacturer prescribing information — used as the primary source for approved dosing and labeled risks, read as label data rather than marketing.
- Reputable secondary references — institutions like Mayo Clinic, used only to cross-check, never as a sole source.
The complete, named list is on our Our Sources page. We do not build pages by summarising competitor articles; we go to the primary source.
3. How we research and write
Before any page is drafted, we define a brief that answers:
- the specific question or task the reader is trying to complete;
- what the strongest existing sources already agree on;
- what this page adds that the reader cannot already get elsewhere — original synthesis, a clearer explanation, a calculation, or a decision framework (our “information-gain” requirement);
- the authoritative sources and their publication dates; and
- how often the page must be re-checked, based on how fast the facts change.
Every page leads with a direct, honest answer, then explains the reasoning, conditions, and exceptions. We write in plain language, define medical terms, and prefer specific, quantified statements over vague reassurance.
4. How we cite
- Each factual claim is linked to the specific source that supports it.
- We record the publication or effective date of any fast-changing fact — prices, coverage rules, and evolving evidence — so you can judge how current it is.
- We clearly distinguish established fact, professional judgement, and our own inference.
- We never fabricate statistics, studies, quotations, patient stories, or credentials.
5. Medical review and accuracy
The Evidence-sourced / Medically reviewed distinction described at the top of this page applies to every clinical page. High-stakes claims — anything touching dosing, drug interactions, contraindications, or safety — receive the most scrutiny and, once our review board is in place, will not publish without clinician sign-off. Nothing on this site is a substitute for personal medical advice from your own provider.
6. Keeping content current
GLP-1 medicine changes quickly. Every page records an original publish date, a last substantive-review date, and a named owner. We set review intervals by risk: short for prices, coverage, and safety information; longer for stable background explanations. We update a page’s visible date only when we have genuinely reviewed or changed the content — never to fake freshness.
7. Independence and funding
GLP-1 Healthcare takes no funding, sponsorship, or editorial input from pharmaceutical manufacturers, pharmacies, or telehealth prescribers. If we ever earn revenue from a commercial link, it will be clearly labelled and will never change our clinical conclusions. The full explanation is on How We’re Funded.
8. Corrections
We fix errors promptly and openly. If you believe something on this site is inaccurate or out of date, please tell us and we will review it against the primary sources. When we correct a material error, we note what changed.
The short version
Independent. Sourced to the recognised authorities, per claim. Honest about what has and hasn’t been clinically reviewed. Updated when the facts actually change — not to game a date.