Editorial Policy & Standards
Independence
Editorial decisions at Ayurveda Town are made by the editorial team alone. Advertisers and commercial partners have no advance sight of articles, no right of reply before publication and no influence over commissioning.
Where an article discusses a company, product or category that also advertises with us, that is not disclosed as a conflict — because it does not function as one. Ad inventory is bought programmatically through networks; we do not know in advance which advertiser will appear beside which article, and neither does the advertiser.
Sourcing
- Primary sources first: peer-reviewed research, official statistics, regulator guidance, standards bodies, statute and manufacturer documentation.
- Secondary reporting is used to find primary sources, not to stand in for them.
- Systematic reviews and meta-analyses are preferred over single trials, and we say when a finding rests on one small study.
- Where a subject has no good evidence base, the article says so rather than borrowing confidence from adjacent fields.
- Anonymous sourcing is not used. We are a explanatory publication, not an investigative one.
Review before publication
Every article is read by an editor before it publishes. Articles that touch health, money, law or physical safety are additionally read by the team member with the closest relevant background — for this site that usually means Dr. Anjali Deshmukh (BAMS, Consulting Editor).
Reviewers check three things: that each factual claim traces to a source, that the strength of the claim matches the strength of the evidence, and that the article does not imply personalised advice it is not in a position to give.
Updating and dating
Articles show the date of last substantive review. A piece is re-checked when the underlying guidance changes, when a reader flags a problem, or on a rolling schedule — high-traffic articles at least annually.
Where an update materially changes a recommendation, a note at the foot of the article records what changed and when.
Corrections and complaints
Errors of fact are corrected on the article, with a dated note. Minor typographical fixes are made silently.
To raise a correction or a complaint, email corrections@ayurvedatown.com. We aim to respond within 3 working days. If you are not satisfied with the outcome, you can escalate to editor@ayurvedatown.com, which reaches the editor directly.
Use of AI tools
Research assistance, transcription, spell-checking and first-pass structuring may involve software tools, as they do at most publications now. Every article is written, verified and signed off by the named human being on the byline, who is accountable for its accuracy.
We do not publish unreviewed machine-generated text, and we do not use synthetic imagery to depict something as if it were a real photograph of a real event.
Images
Photography is licensed from Pexels under the Pexels licence and is illustrative. Unless a caption says otherwise, a photograph does not depict the specific person, place, product or event discussed in the article.
Medical disclaimer
Everything on this site is general information for a general audience. It is reported carefully and reviewed by people with relevant training, but it cannot account for your medical history, your medications, your test results or anything else that makes your situation yours. Reading an article here is not a consultation, and no clinician–patient relationship is created by it.
Speak to a qualified healthcare professional before you start, stop or change any treatment, medication, supplement or exercise programme. If you think you may be having a medical emergency, contact your local emergency number or go to an emergency department. Do not delay seeking care because of something you read here.
We report what the published evidence shows, including when it is weak, contested or absent. Where a claim rests on a single small study, we say so. Where a practice is traditional rather than trialled, we say that too.