Home/Editorial Policy

POL-001Last Updated May 2026

Editorial Policy & Independence

Every decision we make about what to publish, how to score it, and who to recommend is governed by this document. We make it public because accountability is only meaningful when it can be checked.

Independence Guarantee Our Methodology Scoring Scale FSP System Conflict of Interest Corrections Policy

01 — Independence

Independence Guarantee

“No brand, advertiser, or affiliate partner has any influence over the content, ratings, or recommendations published on Fitlabreviews — ever.”

We may earn affiliate commissions when you purchase through our links. These commissions fund the site — editorial research, ingredient database maintenance, and independent testing costs. They do not influence scores, rankings, or what we choose to review.

If a high-earning affiliate product has a poor formula, we score it poorly and say so clearly. Our reputation with readers is worth more than any affiliate arrangement.

02 — Process

Our Methodology

Formula Analysis

We start with the ingredient panel — not the marketing page. Every active ingredient is cross-referenced against the peer-reviewed literature to verify whether the dose used is within the efficacious range. Under-dosed actives, prop blends, and pixie-dusted formulas are flagged explicitly.

Evidence Classification

Each ingredient is assigned an evidence level: Strong (multiple meta-analyses), Moderate (consistent RCTs), Limited (few or small studies), Emerging (early-stage research), or Insufficient (no meaningful human data). We never conflate animal data with human evidence.

Label Transparency Audit

Products using proprietary blends — where ingredient amounts are hidden — receive automatic score deductions. Full label disclosure is a foundational requirement. We cannot evaluate what we cannot see, and neither can you.

Third-Party Verification

We check for certifications from NSF International, Informed Sport, or equivalent independent bodies. Certifications earn green flags. Absence of testing is noted, not penalised unless the category carries contamination risk (e.g. pre-workout stimulants).

Price & Value Assessment

We calculate the cost per gram of primary active ingredient and benchmark it against the category average. Value scoring is category-relative — a premium creatine is compared against other creatines, not protein powders.

Claim Audit

Marketing claims are audited individually and classified as Supported, Context-Dependent, Overstated, or Unsupported. Each verdict appears transparently in the review. Brands do not see or influence this audit prior to publication.

Peer Review & Publication

Every review is read by at least one other editor before publication. We maintain a corrections policy — if we publish an error, we update the content, date the correction, and note what changed. Nothing is silently deleted.

03 — Rating Scale

Scoring Scale

Scores are assigned on a 1–10 integer scale only — no half-points.

9–10Exceptional

Category-leading formula, full label transparency, third-party verified. Recommended without reservation.

8Excellent

Strong formula with minor gaps. Worth buying for most users in this category.

7Good

Solid product with meaningful limitations. May suit some users better than others — see the review for context.

5–6Average

Underwhelming for the price or category. Better alternatives exist and are linked in the review.

1–4Poor / Avoid

Significant formula flaws, deceptive labelling, prop blend abuse, or severe value failures.

04 — Scoring Framework

Fitlab Scoring Protocol (FSP)

Since January 2026, all reviews use the Fitlab Scoring Protocol — a five-pillar weighted framework that produces a transparent composite score alongside the editorial rating.

Formula Integrity

35%

Doses, ingredient quality, synergy

Label Transparency

25%

Full disclosure vs prop blends

3rd-Party Verification

20%

NSF, Informed Sport, etc.

Value Efficiency

12%

$ per gram of active ingredient

Practical Quality

Taste, mixability, packaging

Red flags (e.g. prop blends, banned substances) deduct 0.2–0.5 points from the composite. Green flags (e.g. third-party certification, open-source formula) are noted but do not inflate scores. Read the full FSP methodology →

05 — Transparency

Conflict of Interest — Q&A

Do brands pay for reviews?

No. Reviews are initiated by our editorial team, not by brands. Brands are never notified before a review is published.

Do you accept free products?

Occasionally we receive samples. If so, it is disclosed in the review header. Receiving a sample does not improve or worsen a score — it only affects our ability to assess mixability, taste, and packaging.

How do affiliate links work?

We earn a small commission if you buy through our links. This funds the site. It does not — under any circumstance — change scores or rankings. A product we link to may still score 5/10 if the formula doesn't warrant more.

Can a brand request removal of a review?

No. We do not remove reviews on commercial grounds. We will issue corrections if a formula changes, and we update scores when new evidence emerges.

Who writes the reviews?

All editorial content is produced by the Fitlabreviews team. We do not accept guest posts from supplement brands, PR agencies, or paid contributors.

06 — Accountability

Corrections Policy

We get things wrong. When we do, we correct it visibly — not silently. If a formula changes, a study is retracted, or a reader identifies a factual error, we:

Update the affected content immediately

Add a dated correction note at the top of the article

Log the change in our editorial records

Re-evaluate and update the score if the correction materially affects it

To report an error, contact us at editorial@fitlabreviews.com. We review every submission.

See how we score supplements in detail.

Full FSP Methodology →Affiliate Disclosure Contact Editorial Team