Editorial Policy
How we grade evidence, what we refuse to publish, and how we handle our own commercial conflict.
How we grade evidence
Not all evidence is equal, and a page presenting a rodent study with the same confidence as a meta-analysis is misleading even if every sentence is technically accurate. We use three labels and apply them visibly — including to our own ingredients.
| Grade | Meaning | Example in our own formula |
|---|---|---|
| Moderate | Replicated human evidence, modest effect sizes | Caffeine thermogenesis; caffeine–catechin synergy |
| Limited | Some human evidence, mixed results or quality concerns | — |
| Weak | Preclinical only, null trials, or retracted research | Raspberry ketone, garcinia, green coffee bean |
Three of our five ingredients are graded weak. We publish that on the ingredients page rather than in a footnote.
On retracted research
This deserves its own section because it applies directly to one of our ingredients.
A study being retracted does not mean the ingredient is useless. It means that particular piece of evidence cannot be relied on, and that anyone still citing it is either unaware or hoping you are.
Green coffee bean extract's reputation was built substantially on a 2012 trial that was subsequently retracted, and the FTC brought an action concerning the research. We say so on the ingredients page, on the scam-or-legit page, and here. Our reviewer will not approve a page that cites a retracted study without noting the retraction.
What counts as a source
- Preferred: systematic reviews and meta-analyses, randomised controlled trials in humans, and guidance from the NIH Office of Dietary Supplements, NIDDK, NCCIH, FDA, CDC and equivalent bodies.
- Used with caveats stated: small single trials, observational studies, and mechanistic work.
- Not used as evidence of human effect: in-vitro and rodent studies presented alone. These explain a mechanism; they do not establish that something works in people. This is exactly the gap raspberry ketone's reputation sits in.
- Never used: other supplement marketing pages, undated content farms, retracted studies, and studies cited second-hand without checking what they actually reported.
What we will not publish
- That AlkaBurn treats, cures or prevents obesity or any condition.
- Substantial weight loss claims that do not require dietary change.
- Spot reduction or belly-fat-targeting claims.
- Before-and-after photographs presented as evidence.
- Testimonials framed as typical or expected results.
- Any thermogenic content omitting the caffeine and cardiovascular cautions.
- Any ingredient content omitting the hepatotoxicity signals.
- Numbers presented without a stated source.
A specific editorial commitment
Weight-loss content can cause harm to people with disordered eating histories. Our commitments: we do not use before-and-after imagery, we do not frame any body as a failure state, we do not encourage extreme restriction, we do not present appetite suppression as unambiguously good, and we state on the product and safety pages that anyone with a history of disordered eating should approach this category with caution or avoid it.
Our conflict of interest
We sell AlkaBurn and profit from sales made here. That is a real conflict and it should shape how you read this site.
Our response is to publish what a purely commercial site would omit: three ingredients graded weak, a retracted trial named, the hepatotoxicity signals stated, the caffeine cautions placed above the pricing, and the repeated statement that post-meal walking, sleep and protein intake outperform the capsule. Read us sceptically anyway. We would rather earn a sale from someone who did.
Updates and corrections
Pages show a last-reviewed date. Safety content is re-reviewed when guidance changes. Corrections go to support@alkkaburn.com.