Editorial policy

The rules we hold ourselves to, stated so you can hold us to them as well.

Accuracy

We publish no claim about a product that we cannot trace to a published specification or an official manufacturer statement.
We publish no experience we have not had. We have not tested products, and no page will imply otherwise.
We invent nothing: no statistics, no studies, no quotes, no staff, no credentials, no testimonials, no ratings, no review counts.
Where we do not know something, the page says so rather than filling the gap.
Where evidence is genuinely contested, we describe the disagreement rather than picking a side for tidiness.

Sources

Medical information is drawn from public orthopedic and health bodies, which are named and linked on every condition page. We summarise in our own words rather than reproducing source text. Product specifications are sourced to the manufacturer or retailer, with the retrieval date shown on the table.

Separation of commercial and editorial

No advertiser, manufacturer, or affiliate partner has any input into content. Nobody can pay to appear in a comparison, to be positioned favourably, or to have a competitor excluded. Commission rates play no part in which products appear. Because we publish specifications rather than recommendations, there is comparatively little to influence — but the rule stands regardless.

Corrections and updates

Condition pages carry a last-reviewed date. Comparison tables carry the date their figures were retrieved. When we correct a substantive error, we note the correction on the page rather than quietly editing it. To report an error, use the contact page.

Use of AI tools

[PLACEHOLDER — state accurately how AI tools are used in producing this site, if they are. An honest description is a trust asset; a false denial is not.]