Show the work.
Keep the unknowns.

Two different questions.

What does this ingredient do? The field guide explains nutrient roles and specific studied or licensed uses, with sources and limitations. It does not simulate your neurotransmitter levels.

What do we know about this product? The product trust profile evaluates traceable documentation for a specific Canadian product. Quality documentation does not establish clinical effectiveness or personal suitability.

Five checks. One visible trail.

The score is a weighted measure of evidence coverage. These weights are an editorial convention, not a validated medical instrument or a probability that a product is trustworthy. A documented, current check earns its points; unknown, expired, or unresolved evidence earns none. We do not reweight the remaining checks to hide missing information.

A gap is a gap.

An unreviewed inspection, certification, or recall record is marked “not verified.” A dated review past its interval becomes “refresh needed.” An unresolved concern withholds the numerical score, and remains visible until an editor resolves it—even when the review date expires.

“Partial evidence” means that only part of the record has been documented. It does not mean a product is unsafe. “Well documented” requires all five checks to be current; it still does not establish that you should take the product.

A failed import does not replace the last successful record or advance its checked date. You can see retrieval history and export the evidence behind a product.

Match the right thing.

A brand, licence holder, importer, manufacturing facility, and product may be different entities. NPN, formulation, market, testing scope, and batch number must be matched where applicable. A US certification listing is not silently applied to a Canadian version.

Health Canada’s licensed product database distinguishes licence status from voluntary market notifications. A “not marketed” label is not reliable proof that a licensed product is unavailable.

The inspection database notes that only a portion of licence holders have been inspected. We do not treat an absent entry as an inspection pass.

History needs context.

A brand’s founding year can be recorded with a source, but longevity earns no score points. An older company does not automatically make a better product. The product’s first licence date is a separate fact.

A concern must include its source, date, and affected scope. Allegations, confirmed findings, active recalls, and resolved historical issues should be described distinctly. A recall for a specific batch is not automatically a current problem with every product sold by the company.

We do not rank products by raw adverse-reaction report counts. Health Canada explains why those counts cannot support direct safety comparisons.

What stays out of the score.

• Sales volume, popularity, star reviews, and social-media mentions.
• Affiliate commissions, sponsorships, and payment for placement.
• Unverified “lab tested,” “pharmaceutical grade,” or blanket GMP marketing claims.
• Automatic conclusions about medicine interactions or whether a collection is safe to take together.

Sources can be reviewed and corrected through the protected editorial desk. Every saved assessment creates an audit entry; public pages show the most recent assessment and its scope.