Editorial & Medical Review Policy

Most health websites publish an editorial policy that describes a newsroom they do not have. We would rather tell you exactly how this site works, including the parts that are limitations. You can then judge the content on what it actually is.

Who Writes This Site

The health and Ayurveda content on nirogamonline.com is written and edited by Puneet Aggarwal, who writes as ThatAyurvedaGuy and co-founded Nirogam. Articles are published under a named human being, not an anonymous "editorial team," because you are entitled to know whose judgement you are reading.

To be equally clear about what he is not: Puneet Aggarwal is not a licensed physician. He does not diagnose, prescribe, or treat. Nothing on this site is a consultation, and nothing here is a substitute for one.

We do not currently operate an independent medical review board, and we will not claim one. If that changes, this page will say so, and the reviewers will be named. Where a page has been reviewed or corrected by a qualified practitioner, that will be stated on the page itself rather than implied by a badge.

What We Cite, and in What Order

When an article makes a claim about what a herb or a practice does in the body, we look for primary research before we look for anything else. Our source hierarchy, strongest first:

Systematic reviews and meta-analyses — Cochrane Reviews, and reviews indexed in PubMed Central (PMC).
Randomised controlled trials in humans, ideally placebo-controlled.
Government and institutional health bodies — the NIH National Center for Complementary and Integrative Health (NCCIH), the NIH Office of Dietary Supplements, and NCBI Bookshelf.
Animal and laboratory studies, used only for mechanism, and always labelled as such.
Classical Ayurvedic texts — the Charaka Samhita, Sushruta Samhita, Ashtanga Hridayam and the standard materia medica — cited for what Ayurveda traditionally holds, which is a different kind of claim from what a trial has shown.

Those last two categories matter. Traditional use is a real body of knowledge and we treat it as such, but it is not clinical evidence and we do not dress it up as clinical evidence. When an article says "traditionally used for," that is a deliberate phrase, not a hedge.

How a Reference Gets Onto a Page

Every citation in a References section on this site has been through the same three checks:

The study exists. It was located through a search of the literature, not reconstructed from memory. We do not build citation URLs, PMIDs or DOIs from recall.
The link resolves. Every reference URL is tested and must return a live page before publication. Dead citations are removed, not left to rot.
The study says what we say it says. The abstract is read against the sentence it is attached to. If it does not support that sentence, we rewrite the sentence or drop the citation. Not the other way round.

How We Describe Evidence

We try to represent findings at their real strength, including when that is inconvenient for us.

If the evidence is…	We say…
A large meta-analysis of human trials	What the pooled effect actually was, in plain numbers
A small or single trial	"A small randomised trial" — with the sample size
Animal or in-vitro work	"In animal models" or "in laboratory studies," flagged in the reference list too
Traditional use with little modern study	That it is traditional use and has not been well studied in humans
Absent	That we could not find good evidence. This happens, and we would rather say it.

One specific commitment: research on an individual herb is not research on our finished product. Where we cite a trial of ashwagandha, guggulu, valerian or any other single ingredient, the reference section states plainly that the study examined the herb and not the Nirogam formula it appears in. We have not run clinical trials on our own products, and we do not imply otherwise.

Our Standing Position on Disease Claims

Nirogam products are not intended to diagnose, treat, cure, or prevent any disease. They are traditional Ayurvedic and herbal dietary supplements. No article, product page, review, or email from us should be read as a promise to cure a medical condition, and if you ever find wording on this site that reads that way, it is an error we want to fix. See our full Medical / Health Disclaimer and FDA Disclaimer.

We also write safety information as a normal part of the content rather than as fine print. Where a herb has a known or plausible interaction with medication — sedatives, blood thinners, blood pressure or thyroid medication, and so on — we say so in the body of the article, not in a footnote. Where a herb is not advised in pregnancy, we say that too.

Individual results vary. Customer reviews on this site are individual experiences and are not evidence of what a product will do for you.

Updates and Corrections

Older articles on this site are being reviewed and rewritten on a rolling basis. When a post is substantially revised, the claims in it are re-checked against current sources and references are added or replaced. Rewriting an old post is treated as a fresh accuracy audit, not a cosmetic refresh.

If you find something on this site that is inaccurate, overstated, out of date, or supported by a citation that does not say what we claim — tell us and we will correct it. That is not a formality. A wrong claim on a health site is a real problem, and a reader who catches one is doing us a favour.

Write to globalsupport@nirogam.in with the page and what you think is wrong.

Commercial Disclosure

Nirogam sells the products discussed on this site. That is an obvious conflict of interest and pretending otherwise would insult you. Our response to it is not to hide the commercial link but to hold the content to a standard where the evidence is described the same way whether or not it flatters a product — including saying, in plain words, when the research behind one of our own ingredients is thin.

You can judge whether we live up to that. The References sections are there so you can check our work rather than take our word for it.