Deep dives into the science behind what’s trending in wellness.
Every week, something new goes viral in the wellness space. A supplement ingredient “backed by science.” A protocol that promises to reset your metabolism. A device that claims to reverse aging at the cellular level.
The marketing is always confident. The evidence is usually more complicated.
The Evidence File is where we go past the headline and into the research. We read the studies so you don’t have to — and more importantly, we help you understand what those studies actually prove (and what they don’t).
What We Cover
Trending ingredients. When a supplement ingredient starts showing up everywhere — berberine, ashwagandha, NMN, turkesterone, shilajit, urolithin A — we pull the research and tell you what the human clinical data actually shows. Not the animal studies. Not the in-vitro results. The human data, with context about study quality, sample size, dosing, and who funded it.
Popular protocols. From intermittent fasting variations to cold exposure to the gelatin trick — when a health protocol gains traction, we trace it back to its evidence base. You’ll find out whether there’s substance behind the social media momentum.
Regulatory developments. FDA decisions, FTC enforcement actions, and policy changes that affect what products are available to you and how they’re marketed. When the regulatory landscape shifts, we explain what it means for consumers in plain language.
Myth correction. Some wellness claims have been repeated so often they feel like facts. When the evidence doesn’t support a widely held belief, we lay out the data and let you decide.
How We Approach Evidence
Not all research is created equal. Here’s how we think about the hierarchy:
Systematic reviews and meta-analyses — Multiple studies analyzed together. The strongest form of evidence. When these exist, they anchor our conclusions.
Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in humans — The gold standard for individual studies. We note sample size, duration, blinding method, and funding source.
Observational and epidemiological studies — Useful for identifying associations, but they don’t prove causation. We’re explicit about this distinction every time.
Animal and in-vitro studies — These can suggest mechanisms worth investigating, but they don’t tell you what will happen in a human body. A result in a mouse model or a petri dish is the beginning of a research journey, not the end of one.
Traditional use and historical context — Many ingredients have long histories in traditional medicine systems. We respect this context and present it for what it is — a record of historical use that may inform modern research, but doesn’t substitute for clinical evidence.
Our Commitment
If the evidence is strong, we’ll tell you. If it’s weak, we’ll tell you that too. If it doesn’t exist yet, we won’t pretend it does. The wellness space has enough hype. What it needs is more honesty about what we know, what we don’t know, and what’s worth watching as the science develops.
That’s what The Evidence File is for.