Editorial policy
The rules we hold ourselves to, published so you can check whether we follow them. Last updated 2026-08-26.
1. Sourcing
Every factual claim traces to a primary source: the printed Supplement Facts panel, the official order page, the published return policy, or peer-reviewed literature indexed on PubMed. We do not cite other affiliate sites, press releases distributed on behalf of the brand, or AI-generated summaries as evidence for a factual claim.
2. Dose verification
When a seller names an ingredient, we look up the dose used in the research on it and publish that figure so a reader can compare. Where no amount is disclosed — which on this product is everywhere — we say so rather than estimating. And where an ingredient is studied in grams but sold in a capsule, we say that too, because it is arithmetic rather than opinion.
3. Undisclosed means undisclosed
Where a manufacturer does not publish an amount, we write that it is not published. We do not estimate, infer from ingredient order, or describe an unknown quantity as though it were known. On this product that applies to every ingredient on every page, plus the probiotic strain designations and CFU count.
4. Safety before benefits
On every substantive page, interaction and contraindication information appears above benefit information. Where an ingredient carries a documented caution the seller omits — the green tea extract liver signal and the glucose-lowering interactions being the clearest here — we publish it regardless. And we say plainly when a symptom belongs in a consulting room rather than a shopping basket.
5. Claims we will not repeat
We do not reproduce a seller’s claim simply because the seller made it. On this product that means we do not repeat “attacks the harmful bacteria that sabotage weight loss”, which is not how prebiotics work; we do not present a countdown timer or a “96% of customers” figure as information; and we do not quote a review count that links to no verifiable platform. Where we credit a seller, it is for something checkable.
6. Clinical review
Every page touching dosing, interactions, contraindications or physiological mechanism is reviewed by Dr. Lena Kessler, PharmD, BCPP before publication. Clinical review covers factual accuracy and safety framing; it is not a product endorsement and does not constitute medical advice to any reader.
7. Dating and corrections
Every page carries the date its claims were last verified. When we are shown an error we correct it, note the correction, and re-date the page. Corrections go to editorial@vappocept.com and we aim to respond within five business days.
8. Commercial independence
We earn affiliate commission on purchases made through our links. No advertiser, manufacturer or affiliate network reviews our content before publication, and none has the ability to require a change to it. Our affiliate disclosure sets out the relationship in full.
9. Testimonials
Customer statements we publish are labelled as individual experiences. Accompanying portraits are identified as illustrative stock images. We do not publish star ratings or customer counts we cannot verify against a third-party platform.
10. Who we will tell not to buy
Where the evidence indicates a reader should not purchase — because of an interaction, a contraindication, or because their symptoms warrant medical assessment instead — we say so plainly, on the same page as the purchase link. A referral site that never says no is not a reference, it is an advertisement.