Editorial standards
The standards that govern our reporting, review and publication decisions.
Authorship and sources
Original reporting, analysis and editorial press reviews require identifiable authors and verifiable sources. We prioritise original documents, scientific studies, information from public authorities and directly substantiated statements. Press releases are identified and their claims assessed independently.
Submissions move from draft to editorial review and approval. Authorship, sources, publication rights and relevant interests must be documented before publication. Translations follow the same approval process.
Medical evidence and review
Product trends, marketing claims and clinical evidence are assessed separately. Medical claims require qualified review before publication. Reporting must explain relevant risks, uncertainty and study limitations, without suggesting that an isolated finding establishes a treatment’s effectiveness or safety.
Our articles provide information and context. They do not replace an individual medical examination, consultation or treatment.
International press review
External headlines and links identify the originating publication and lead to its original page. An item’s position in a feed does not establish that it is a cover story. Full republication requires documented permission; the original author, source and nature of the republication must remain clear. External links are not submitted to Google as our own reporting.
Independence and commercial interests
Paid contributions, affiliate relationships, fees, supplied products and other relevant interests must be disclosed. Advertising and sponsored material are clearly identified. Reporting must not appear to be an independent assessment if relevant financial interests have been withheld.
AI assistance and imagery
AI assistance is disclosed with the article and never replaces source verification or human editorial responsibility. Generated images are identified as illustrations and are not presented as documentary photographs of real events, patients or treatment outcomes. Third-party images require appropriate usage rights.
Corrections and updates
Substantive changes to published articles carry a visible correction or update notice. The original publication date is retained. Fetching an article again, translating it or making a purely technical change does not turn an older report into new reporting.
Historical sources and annotated editions
Historical material must have an identifiable publication, issue or date, a precise source location and a documented rights status before publication. Facsimiles, transcriptions, translations and contemporary commentary are labelled separately. A transcription is checked against the source image; a translation does not replace the original wording.
Historical clinical statements are not presented as current medical guidance. Any contemporary medical claim introduced by an editor requires its own current sources and appropriate review. Material that cannot be read reliably is marked as uncertain or omitted rather than reconstructed.
An archive date describes the historical source. Publication and revision dates on Aesthetic Times describe the contemporary edition. Libraries and collections are credited as sources, not presented as endorsing partners without a documented agreement.
Explore the historical edition