Nuestra Metodología

1. Protocolo de revisión

Products are evaluated from manufacturer-published ingredient lists, regulatory filings, and third-party Certificates of Analysis when available. Each label dose of an ingredient with a reference dose on our ingredient pages is compared with that dose, taken from peer-reviewed clinical trials; ingredients without one are listed but not scored.

2. Política de conflictos de interés

We earn affiliate commissions from links on commercial pages. Affiliate relationships do not influence:

• 5-pillar scores (set before any affiliate program is evaluated)
• Listicle ranking position (driven by score + use-case fit only)
• Pros/cons content (criticism is preserved even on affiliate-active products)
• Clinical-dose audit verdicts (purely data-driven against PubMed-indexed RCTs)

We do not accept payment for reviews, sponsored content placements, or guaranteed-position promotion. Affiliate disclosures appear at the top of every commercial page, before the first call-to-action, in compliance with FTC 16 CFR Part 255 (US), ASA CAP Code (UK), and equivalent advertising codes in each region we publish.

3. Política de citación de fuentes

Clinical-dose claims are sourced from PubMed-indexed human randomized controlled trials, meta-analyses, and Examine.com syntheses. Regulatory claims are sourced from primary regulator documents (FDA, EFSA, TGA, Health Canada, MHLW Consumer Affairs Agency, ANMAT, ANVISA, COFEPRIS, SFDA, BPOM, HSA, NPRA, JAKIM, BPJPH). When a claim cannot be sourced from primary literature or a primary regulator, it is either omitted or flagged as "limited evidence" / "manufacturer claim only". We do not cite secondary aggregators (Healthline, Verywell) as primary sources for clinical claims.

4. Política de correcciones

We aim to respond to substantive editorial corrections within 5 business days and to update or retract incorrect content within 10 business days of verification. When a correction is made:

• The page's dateModified Article-schema field is updated to reflect the change.
• For factual corrections (dose values, regulatory status, brand ownership), the prior statement is replaced and a brief note is added to the page when the correction is material to a reader's purchase decision.
• We do not silently delete published claims. Significant corrections to scored comparisons trigger a re-score under the same 5-pillar framework with a visible date.

Send corrections to [email protected]. Include the page URL, the specific claim, and a primary source supporting the correct version.

5. Identidad del equipo editorial

The Nootropic Lab operates as an independent editorial collective. We do not disclose individual contributors by name and do not feature personal brands within reviews. This is a deliberate choice: it keeps the focus on the methodology and the data, and reduces the risk that a single contributor's preferences disproportionately influence rankings. Every review applies the same 5-pillar framework documented above; consistency is the credibility signal, not authority by persona.

6. Marco regulatorio por región

Each regional edition of this site applies the YMYL disclaimer language mandated or expected by that region's primary regulator: DSHEA (US FDA), Reg (EC) 1924/2006 + EFSA register (EU), Health Canada NPN (CA), TGA Therapeutic Goods Advertising Code (AU), PMD Act + FFC + FOSHU (JP), ANVISA / COFEPRIS / ANMAT (LATAM, with a catalogue check against the substances named in the seven products prohibited by ANMAT Disposición 2105/2022 for Argentine traffic), SFDA + Halal certification (GCC), HSA + BPOM + NPRA + Halal mandatory ID/MY (SEA). Cognitive claims that are not approved by the relevant regulator are reframed as ingredient mechanisms or consumer experience and never asserted as label-grade health claims.