Editorial Policy
This page describes how the written material on this site is produced and what standards a figure has to meet before it appears.
Who writes this
Articles, help pages, and reference material are written and reviewed by the Tide Front Supply research team. We publish under a team byline rather than an individual one because that is accurate: material is drafted, checked, and revised by more than one person.
We do not employ a licensed clinician, and nothing published here is reviewed by one. Anyone claiming otherwise about a research-reagent supplier is worth being sceptical of, so we state it plainly instead. Nothing on this site is medical advice, and it is not written to be.
The rule a number has to satisfy
Most compounds in this category have no human dosing study. A range extrapolated from a rodent model reads exactly like one from a registrational trial once it is set in the same typeface, so we do not let a figure appear on its own.
Every dosing figure we publish carries an evidence tier stating what stands behind it:
- Approved label or registrational trial — the figure is on a regulatory label or from the trial it was based on.
- Limited human data — human studies that are small, early-phase, or for a different indication.
- Animal data only — no human dosing study exists; the range is an inference, not a finding.
- Reported practice — no study establishes it at all.
The tier is displayed next to the number, not in a legend elsewhere. Where a tier was assigned by hand, the page says so; where it was defaulted to the weakest tier the citations clearly support, the page says that too. We would rather understate evidence than overstate it, because only one of those is dangerous.
What we do when we cannot cite something
We print no number. A compound with no citable range says so, and says why, in the place the figure would have gone. This is the common case in this category rather than the exception, and filling those gaps with plausible-looking figures is the single most damaging thing a supplier in this space can do.
That constraint is enforced in the software, not only in an editor's judgement: a compound preset cannot exist in our codebase without a citation and a tier attached to it.
Calculators
The calculators convert between units using figures you supply. They do not originate a dose.
Their arithmetic is unit-tested. The explanatory copy around them is tested against the calculators themselves, so a worked example in the prose cannot drift from what the tool actually computes — a page that disagrees with the instrument printed above it is worse than a page with no explanation.
What we do not publish
- Dosing recommendations, protocols, or instructions for administering anything to a person or an animal.
- Claims of clinical efficacy, safety, or therapeutic benefit.
- Anecdotal dose figures presented as guidance.
- Testimonials or outcome claims about human use.
This is partly a legal position and partly an editorial one. Material sold for laboratory research should be described the way laboratory material is described.
Sources
Where we cite a study we link it, name what it is, and say what in it supports the claim — not merely that it exists. Where the strongest available source is weak, we say the source is weak rather than omitting it.
Corrections
If something here is wrong, tell us at support@tidefrontsupply.com and we will correct it. Corrections to a figure or a factual claim are made to the page itself; we do not quietly delete material that turned out to be mistaken.