How We Work
We believe you have a right to know exactly how our research is conducted, what tools we use, and where our information comes from. No black boxes. No vague credentials. Just the process.
Our Research Process
Every article and book published under the Alethia Research Institute name follows a defined research process. Here is what that looks like in practice:
Topic Identification
We identify topics based on two criteria: high public interest with widespread misinformation, and an active body of peer-reviewed research. We do not write about areas where the science is too thin to support meaningful conclusions.
Primary Literature Search
We search PubMed, ClinicalTrials.gov, and major journal databases for peer-reviewed studies, systematic reviews, meta-analyses and randomized controlled trials. We prioritize recent human clinical data over animal studies and in vitro research.
AI-Assisted Analysis
We use AI tools to help process and synthesize large bodies of research - identifying patterns, surfacing relevant studies and organizing complex information. This dramatically increases the breadth of literature we can cover. All AI output is reviewed and verified against original sources before publication. We never publish AI-generated claims without human verification.
Source Verification
Every specific claim is traced to its original source. We check that the study design, sample size, duration and outcomes actually support the claim being made - not just the abstract. Many supplement studies are small, short and funded by manufacturers; we flag this context when relevant.
Nuance and Limitations
We actively look for evidence that contradicts or complicates the main finding. Where clinical evidence is weak, mixed or context-dependent, we say so. We do not suppress inconvenient data to make a cleaner narrative.
Source Citation
All articles include a sources section with full citations. Where possible, we link directly to the study so you can read the original. We believe you should be able to verify everything we write, independently and for free.
Our Use of Artificial Intelligence
We use AI as a research and writing tool. We believe in being transparent about this because it affects how you should evaluate our content - and because we think most publishers who use AI and do not disclose it are doing their readers a disservice.
What AI does - and what it does not do
AI Is Used For
- Processing and synthesizing large volumes of research literature
- Identifying relevant studies across multiple databases
- Drafting article structures and initial content
- Checking internal consistency and logical flow
- Formatting and presenting complex information clearly
AI Does Not
- Publish claims without human verification at the original source
- Replace judgment about research quality and study design
- Generate citations - all sources are manually verified
- Make final editorial decisions about what to include or exclude
- Operate without review of its outputs for factual accuracy
The use of AI in research and publishing is rapidly becoming standard across the industry. The difference between responsible and irresponsible use is human oversight. We maintain that oversight at every step. If you find a factual error in any of our content, contact us - we will investigate, correct and document any changes transparently.
Why We Are Anonymous
Anonymity is not evasion. It is protection.
The Alethia Research Institute publishes under a collective name rather than individual identities. This is a deliberate and considered decision - not an attempt to avoid accountability.
The reason is simple: when you write critically about pharmaceutical industry practices, media narratives around health, and the financial interests that shape public health guidelines, you invite pressure. Journals get contacted. Employers get called. Individuals get targeted.
By publishing collectively and anonymously, we protect the ability to say what the evidence actually shows - without the chilling effect of personal exposure. The research speaks for itself. The sources are cited. The claims can be verified independently. Our identity adds nothing to the validity of the argument.
What we are not anonymous about: our methods, our sources, our standards and our willingness to correct errors. Those are public and permanent.
What We Hold Ourselves To
Evidence Grading
We distinguish between strong evidence (multiple large RCTs), moderate evidence (smaller trials, consistent animal data) and emerging evidence (early-stage research). We do not treat all positive studies equally.
Conflict of Interest
We do not accept paid placements, sponsored content or manufacturer partnerships. No supplement brand pays for coverage on this site or in our books. Period.
Corrections Policy
When we are wrong, we say so publicly. Corrections are documented with the date and nature of the change. We do not quietly edit errors without disclosure.
Primary Sources
We cite original studies, not secondary sources citing other secondary sources. If we cannot access the original paper, we do not make the claim.
Context Matters
A study in mice is not evidence for humans. A study in elderly diabetics is not evidence for healthy 35-year-olds. We respect these distinctions and communicate them clearly.
No Medical Advice
Our content is educational, not prescriptive. We explain what the research shows. We do not tell you what to take. That decision belongs to you and your healthcare provider.
Where Our Research Comes From
Primary databases and sources we rely on:
PubMed / MEDLINE
The primary database for biomedical literature. Our first stop for any health or supplement claim. We search for systematic reviews and meta-analyses first, then individual RCTs.
ClinicalTrials.gov
The US registry of clinical trials. We use it to find the most current trial data, including unpublished results and ongoing studies that have not yet appeared in journal form.
Major Peer-Reviewed Journals
Nature, Science, JAMA, The Lancet, New England Journal of Medicine, Cell Metabolism, Nature Medicine and specialist journals in nutrition, gerontology and pharmacology.
Cochrane Reviews
The gold standard for systematic evidence synthesis. When a Cochrane review exists on a topic, it is our primary reference for the overall state of the evidence.
What We Treat with Caution
Industry-funded studies, studies with very small sample sizes, animal-only data presented as human evidence, preprints without peer review, and media reports that misrepresent the underlying study conclusions.
Questions about our methodology?
If you spot an error, have a question about our sources, or want to suggest a correction, we want to hear from you.