Read the document in full
Our proposed review process begins with the full document, rather than a cropped screenshot or a testing logo. We would record the named laboratory, report date, sample identifier, and the information linking the report to the product under discussion.
This is a sample editorial checklist. No laboratory or vendor has been assessed for this edition.
Ask what was examined
A report should be read within its stated scope. We would describe the listed analyses, methods, units, and any reporting limits without converting a single result into a blanket claim about safety.
Unclear documentation would prompt questions to the laboratory or vendor. It would not prompt us to fill the gaps with assumptions.
Make the limits visible
Future reporting would distinguish a document review from independent testing commissioned by this publication. It would state which records were available, which were missing, and what could not be verified.
The source trail
References & further reading
Background resources and editorial policy. These links do not imply endorsement of Kratom Expert.
