Sources and evidence policy
What counts as support for a Blimbi claim, how uncertainty changes our language, and what does not count as medical evidence.
Source hierarchy
We prefer current guidance from recognized public-health and medical bodies, followed by systematic reviews and meta-analyses of randomized trials, individual randomized trials, and strong observational research where trials cannot answer the question. Mechanistic or animal work may explain a hypothesis but is not generalized to proven human outcomes.
Competitor articles, social posts, search volume, and keyword tools are not medical evidence. They can reveal a question people ask; they cannot substantiate the answer.
From study to sentence
A responsible claim should preserve who was studied, what was compared, how long it lasted, how large an observed difference was, and what remains uncertain. If findings conflict or the evidence is indirect, the page must say so. Absence of evidence is not converted into a benefit claim.
Current publication boundary
Blimbi’s editorial source registry and article-level source packs have not yet been published. This page defines the standard that future cited content must pass. It is not a substitute for citations and is not used to make uncited health-outcome claims today.