Press

Email hello@longlifelist.com with “Press” in the subject and your deadline in the first line. For a question about a specific evidence grade, write to editorial@longlifelist.com and we will put you in touch with the reviewer who signed it, on the record.

Accurate

• “A database that grades the evidence behind longevity interventions, with a named medical reviewer on every page.”
• “An evidence-grading platform and clinic directory for longevity medicine.”
• “A site that publishes the formula behind its evidence scores and the reviewer’s reasoning behind every grade change.”

Not accurate

• “A longevity clinic” or “a telehealth provider”. We do not provide care, employ clinicians to treat patients, or prescribe anything.
• “Recommends”. We grade evidence. Only grades A and B are ever framed as something a reader could act on, and even then the phrasing is about what the evidence supports rather than what we advise.
• “Ranks the best supplements”. We grade an intervention against a specific outcome in a specific population. A ranked list of molecules is exactly the thing the grading structure exists to avoid.

Graded intervention–outcome pairs

0

Published intervention pages

0

Studies appraised

0

Retracted studies flagged in place

0

Active medical reviewers

0

Published grade decisions

0

Published corrections

0

Clinics listed

0

Countries with a listed clinic

0

Evidence formula version 1.0.0, hype formula version 1.0.0. Both are documented in full on the methodology page.

Name the outcome

A grade belongs to an intervention–outcome pair. "Creatine is graded A" is not a fact we published; "creatine is graded A for muscle strength in resistance-trained adults" might be. Grades differ by outcome on the same page.

Include the grade meaning

A bare letter is not usable information for your readers. Each grade has a one-sentence meaning published alongside it, and we would rather you used it than paraphrased it.

Date it

Grades change, and every change is public with the reviewer’s reasoning. Say when you retrieved it and link to the page, which carries its own review date.

Link to the page, not to a screenshot

The page carries the studies, the reviewer and the current grade. A screenshot carries a number that may have moved.

You do not need our permission

The evidence data is available under an open licence with a citation requirement, described on the data page. You can also pull it through the API and recompute the scores yourself — and if your numbers differ from ours, we want to hear about it.

Will

• Explain a grade, on the record, with the reviewer who signed it.
• Tell you what our revenue lines are and roughly how they rank by size.
• Tell you what we have got wrong, and point you at the corrections log.
• Say when we do not know something, including how large our evidence gaps are.

Will not

• Comment on an individual’s health, or on whether a named person’s protocol is sensible.
• Give you anything about a member, a patient, or a clinic’s patients. Not aggregated, not anonymised, not off the record.
• Recommend an intervention for a reader. We grade evidence; a recommendation for a person is a clinical act.
• Give you a quote criticising a named competitor or a named clinician.
• Confirm or deny that a specific clinic is a customer.

The mark, colour, type and usage rules are on our brand guidelines; logo files are available on request from hello@longlifelist.com. Two rules matter: do not alter the grade colours or letters when you reproduce a grade badge, because the letter, the label and the colour are three independent channels carrying the same information and removing one breaks it for colour-blind readers; and do not use our logo in a way that implies we endorse a product, a clinic or a study.