Every change, on the record.
When we get something wrong — or when the data underneath an audit changes — we update the page and add an entry here. We do not quietly rewrite history.
Recent corrections
9 ENTRIES · NEWEST FIRSTRefreshed with current data and reviewed for accuracy.
Refreshed with current data and reviewed for accuracy.
Refreshed with current data and reviewed for accuracy.
Refreshed with current data and reviewed for accuracy.
Refreshed with current data and reviewed for accuracy.
Refreshed with current data and reviewed for accuracy.
Refreshed with current data and reviewed for accuracy.
Updated last-tested date and shipping median after a reader-submitted COA contradicted our March finding.
A reader sent in a March 2026 third-party COA showing 96.4% purity on a batch we recorded at 91.2%. Re-tested an independent vial and confirmed the higher figure. Subscore for COA quality moved from 8.1 to 8.5; composite from 83 to 84.
Composite weighting clarified: shipping subscore moved from 25% to 20% to make room for an explicit 25% label-accuracy weight.
Earlier copy of the methodology page implied label accuracy was bundled into purity. We split the two and rebalanced. No vendor scores were retroactively adjusted; the next audit cycle uses the revised weights.
Our policy
3 CATEGORIESWe log every change in three categories:
- Factual — A specific number, date, or claim was wrong. Includes lab-result disagreements that meet our 5-percentage-point threshold.
- Methodological — The way we score, weight, or test changed. Earlier audits are not retroactively rescored unless explicitly noted.
- Transparency — A non-factual disclosure update: new affiliate relationship, editorial conflict, ownership change.
On the affected page, the correction appears as a dated note above the fold for at least 30 days, then moves into the “updated” metadata. The entry here is permanent.