Our editorial approach
We produce material that explains what is known — and what remains uncertain — about ibogaine where it intersects with trauma recovery. Editorial decisions are guided by transparency: we identify sources, differentiate peer-reviewed findings from anecdote, and flag risks or gaps in the literature.
When it helps readers navigate the landscape, we link to authoritative registries and summaries; for example, we cite peer-reviewed summaries and established medical references when describing how evidence is evaluated, and we sometimes reference general overviews such as the National Library of Medicine's catalog for literature searches (NCBI / PubMed) to show where primary studies are indexed.
How we vet content
Content is sourced from original research papers, clinical registries, regulatory guidance, and recognized academic summaries. We explicitly distinguish registry or guideline findings from emerging clinical reports, and we cross-check claims against authoritative sources such as the U.S. Food and Drug Administration's public materials (FDA) or relevant university summaries (Harvard University) when appropriate to establish context.
Editorial principles
- Independence. We do not operate as a clinic or treatment provider; our role is informational.
- Plain language. We aim for clarity so readers and supporters can understand evidence without jargon.
- Evidence-first. We prioritize peer-reviewed and official sources while noting when evidence is preliminary.
- Audience-specific. Material is framed for people living with trauma and the people who support them.