The short version
What changed on this page — 4 September 2026
An earlier version of this page described a seven-criteria system producing a score out of 5.0 for every product. We have removed it, and removed the scores from every review on this site.
The reason is simple: a decimal score implies a measurement. We never measured anything — we read labels and compared them to published research. Presenting a judgement as “4.6 out of 5” dressed up an opinion as a result, and the weighting behind it was never published, so nobody could check it. Verdicts are now given in words, with the reasoning attached, so you can disagree with the conclusion and still use the facts.
The same audit removed fabricated customer testimonials and star-rating markup from a number of reviews. We are documenting that here rather than quietly fixing it.
ON THIS PAGE
Who Writes These Reviews
Every review on this site is written and signed by Malkiat Singh, the founder and editor of Men’s Health Authority. There is no anonymous “research team” and no panel of unnamed experts. One person reads the labels and one person is accountable for what the page says.
He is not a doctor, a pharmacist, a dietitian or a researcher, and nothing on this site is medical advice. The value here is not clinical authority — it is that someone actually reads the Supplement Facts panel, looks up what dose the studies used, and reports the gap honestly.
How a Review Gets Made
Every product review follows the same sequence. If a step cannot be completed, the review says so rather than filling the gap with something plausible.
| Step | What we do |
|---|---|
| 1. Verify the label | We find the seller’s published Supplement Facts panel and record every ingredient and dose per serving, the serving size and the units per container. If the seller does not publish doses, that becomes the review’s headline finding — we do not copy dose tables from other review sites, because those are frequently invented. |
| 2. Verify price & terms | We record the price tiers, shipping, the guarantee length and its actual conditions on a specific date, and we print that date on the page: “as listed on date, confirm at checkout.” Prices in this category change often, so the date is not decoration. |
| 3. Identify the seller | Company name, returns address, manufacturing claims, and which payment processor handles checkout. A product with no company name and no address gets said out loud. |
| 4. Audit each ingredient | For every meaningful ingredient we ask three questions: what does human research show for this specific outcome; what dose did that research use; and how does the amount in this bottle compare? An ingredient at 20% of the studied dose is reported as such. |
| 5. Check what is absent | Often more revealing than what is present. A prostate formula with no beta-sitosterol, or a sleep formula with no melatonin, is telling you something about itself. |
| 6. Interactions & who should avoid it | Drug interactions, documented safety signals, and the situations where the underlying symptom needs a doctor rather than a capsule. This section is never skipped, even on products we rate well. |
| 7. Cost comparison | Cost per day, and what the same evidenced ingredients cost bought individually at labelled doses. This is usually the most useful number on the page. |
| 8. Write the verdict | In words, with the reasoning attached, and with a re-check date. |
How We Classify a Claim
Most confusion in this industry comes from three very different things being presented as if they were one. We separate them explicitly, on every page:
| Type of claim | What it is worth |
|---|---|
| Seller claim | What the sales page asserts. Evidence value: none on its own. We report it as a claim, attributed to the seller, never as a finding. |
| Ingredient evidence | Published human research on an ingredient, at a stated dose. Useful — but it applies to that dose, not automatically to the amount in the product. This is where most of our analysis lives. |
| Finished-product evidence | A trial of the actual product as sold. This is the gold standard, and in this category it is almost always absent. When it is absent, we say so plainly rather than letting ingredient research stand in for it. |
Why this matters: “clinically studied ingredients” on a label usually means someone once studied an ingredient at a dose the product does not contain. Reading that as evidence the product works is the single most common mistake in supplement reviewing, and it is the one this site is built to avoid.
Why We Use Words, Not Scores
You will not find “4.6 out of 5” anywhere on this site. A numeric score implies a measurement, and we did not take one — we read a label and compared it to published research. Putting a decimal on that opinion would dress up a judgement as a result.
Instead every review ends with a plain-language verdict and the reasoning that produced it. The verdicts we use:
| Verdict | What it means |
|---|---|
| Reasonable | Doses broadly match the research, the claims are proportionate, and the terms are fair. Often qualified: “reasonable, with conditions.” |
| Mixed | Some ingredients at real doses, others token or irrelevant. Might do something; the marketing overstates it. |
| Weak | Meaningful gaps — under-dosing, missing information, or a mechanism that does not hold up. Not necessarily unsafe; just not supported. |
| Weak — leaning avoid | A specific safety concern, or a formula that does not match what it is sold as. We would not buy it. |
Verdicts are editorial opinions. They are not lab results, and they are not medical advice.
What We Will Never Publish
These are hard rules, not preferences. If you find any of them on this site, it is an error and we want to hear about it.
• Invented customer testimonials. No “James M., 52, Colorado” with a five-star quote. If we have not verified a real person, there is no person.
• Fabricated tests or cohorts. No “we tracked 32 men for 60 nights.” We have never run a trial and we will not claim to have run one.
• Aggregate rating markup. No AggregateRating or reviewCount schema, because there are no reviews to aggregate. Star ratings in search results that nobody actually gave are a lie told to the search engine as well as the reader.
• Numeric scores. See above.
• Doses we could not verify. If the seller does not publish an amount, we write “dose not disclosed” — we do not borrow a number from another site.
• Disease claims. No supplement here treats, cures or prevents anything, and we do not imply otherwise.
• Doorway pages. One product, one review. We do not build a dozen near-identical pages to catch keyword variations.
In August and September 2026 we audited this entire site against these rules and found earlier content that broke several of them. Those pages have been rebuilt from verified labels, the fabricated elements removed, duplicate pages consolidated into single reviews, and the scoring system withdrawn. We are saying so here rather than quietly fixing it, because a standards page that hides its own corrections is not worth much.
How We Make Money
Men’s Health Authority earns affiliate commissions. If you buy a product after clicking a link here, the seller may pay us a percentage, at no extra cost to you. Commissions in this category are substantial — often over $100 on a multi-bottle order — and we think you should know that rather than have to guess it.
What that means in practice, and how we try to keep it honest:
- Every affiliate link is disclosed on the page it appears on, and marked
rel="nofollow sponsored". - Call-to-action buttons are neutral. “View seller price” and “Check current price” — not “Claim your discount” or “Order now before stock runs out.” Manufactured urgency is a sales tactic, not information.
- We publish negative verdicts on products we are paid to promote. Several reviews on this site tell you not to buy the product they link to. That is the arrangement working as intended.
- Comparison pages are ordered by how well a formula matches the problem it is sold for, and we do not accept payment for placement, for a rewrite, or for removing a review.
The obvious limitation: a site that earns money when you buy something has an incentive you should factor in. The check on that is whether the reasoning on the page holds up on its own. Every review shows its working — the doses, the studies, the gaps — so you can disagree with the conclusion and still use the facts.
Where a Supplement Is the Wrong Answer
A significant share of what we review is aimed at symptoms that deserve a doctor rather than a capsule. We say so in the review every time, even though it costs us sales, because the alternative is helping someone delay care.
- Urinary symptoms in men over 50 — weak flow, night-time trips, incomplete emptying. These need examination, a PSA test and a flow assessment. Inability to pass urine is a medical emergency.
- Chronic insomnia — the first-line treatment in clinical guidelines is CBT-I, which outperforms sleeping pills at twelve months. Loud snoring with daytime sleepiness may be sleep apnoea, which no supplement touches.
- Blood sugar — raised glucose or HbA1c is a diagnosis, not a supplement opportunity.
- Anything alongside prescription medication — interactions are real, and a pharmacist will check them for free.
Nothing on this site is a substitute for advice from a qualified healthcare provider who knows your history.
Corrections & Updates
Every review carries an update log at the foot of the page recording what changed, when, and what was re-verified — and a next re-check date. Reviews are re-checked at least quarterly, and sooner whenever a formula, price or guarantee changes.
If you find something wrong on this site — a dose that does not match the bottle in your hand, a price that has changed, a claim we got wrong, or a source that does not say what we said it says — tell us and we will correct it and note the correction in the update log.
Corrections, label disputes and questions: team@menshealthauthority.com
If you are a seller and believe a review misrepresents your product, send the current Supplement Facts panel and we will re-verify against it. We will correct any factual error. We will not remove an accurate negative assessment.