Editorial
Editorial Policy
ApexTruth Health | Version 1.0 | Last updated May 23, 2026
This page describes how ATH researches, writes, and publishes editorial content. It exists for two reasons: so readers understand how we work, and so our methodology is a matter of public record.
Why we exist
ATH publishes investigative health journalism. That means we write about research funded by parties with financial interests in the outcome. We write about regulatory decisions made by agencies that receive funding from the industries they regulate. We write about scientific consensus that has shifted after industry funding was disclosed.
This is not conspiracy content. It is journalism methodology that follows the money. Every major investigative newsroom applies it. We apply it to health.
Core methodology
1. Follow the funding
Every article that cites a study identifies who funded that study. If the funder had a financial interest in the outcome, we say so explicitly. This is not an accusation of fraud. Funding bias is a documented phenomenon in peer-reviewed literature. We disclose it the same way academic journals do.
2. Primary sources only
We cite the original study, not a press release or secondary summary. We link to the actual paper. We name the lead researcher and the institution. Where possible we link to the DOI.
3. Five-level evidence system
Every factual claim in an ATH article is graded against our evidence scale:
We never represent Level 2 evidence as if it were Level 5. Evidence level is disclosed in each article.
4. Verdict system
Every article concludes with one of five verdicts based on the weight of available evidence. Verdicts are editorial conclusions, clearly labeled as such:
- Safer Alternative Exists
- Evidence Supports
- Plausible Concern: Better Safe Than Sorry
- Consult Doctor
- Worth Investigating
5. Opinion is labeled
When ATH draws conclusions that go beyond what cited research directly states, we label those conclusions as analysis or opinion. Factual claims and editorial conclusions are not mixed without disclosure.
6. Language matches evidence strength
We do not use language implying certainty when evidence is preliminary. We do not hedge when evidence is overwhelming. The language we use is calibrated to the evidence level and applied consistently across all articles.
What ATH does not do
- We do not accept payment from brands or manufacturers to cover their products favorably.
- We do not name specific brands in editorial content. Articles establish the standard; the marketplace shows products that meet it.
- We do not suppress corrections. If a factual claim is wrong, we correct it and note the correction in the article.
- We do not publish claims we cannot source to a named study, named researcher, and named funder.
- We do not make disease treatment claims. ATH content is health information, not medical advice.
Corrections policy
If you believe a factual claim in an ATH article is inaccurate, email hello@apextruthhealth.com with the specific claim, the article URL, and the evidence you believe contradicts it.
We will investigate within 10 business days. If the claim is wrong, we will:
- Correct the article
- Add a correction notice at the top noting what changed and when
- Not remove the original claim from the correction notice. Readers deserve to know what changed.
Corrections are permanent and visible. We do not quietly edit articles without disclosure.
Editorial independence
ATH editorial decisions are made by ATH editors. No seller, advertiser, investor, or external party has editorial approval rights over any article. Editorial and commerce are structurally separated: articles establish the standard, products link to the marketplace, and the two are never mixed in a way that makes editorial conclusions contingent on marketplace revenue.
First Amendment basis
ATH publishes on matters of public concern: the funding of health research, the relationship between industry money and regulatory outcomes, and the information people need to make health decisions. This content is protected under the First Amendment to the United States Constitution.
Truth is our primary legal defense. Every factual claim is traceable to a primary source. Commentary on matters of public interest, including criticism of institutions, regulatory agencies, and industry practices, is protected speech under the fair comment doctrine and First Amendment jurisprudence.
Iowa's anti-SLAPP statute (Iowa Code Chapter 657A) provides additional protection against lawsuits filed to suppress or burden speech on matters of public concern.
Contact
Editorial questions or corrections: hello@apextruthhealth.com
Version history
| Version | Date | Changes |
|---|---|---|
| 1.0 | May 23, 2026 | Initial policy. Methodology, evidence system, verdict system, corrections policy, editorial independence, First Amendment basis, anti-SLAPP notice. |