How information is sourced and vetted
Our editors compile primary research (journal articles, registries, and trial reports) and corroborate factual claims against authoritative sources. When citing historical or regulatory context we rely on recognized references — for example, broad clinical trial guidance from the U.S. National Institutes of Health at NIH and general overviews such as established encyclopedic entries like the ibogaine page on Wikipedia for non-specialist context. We avoid translating preliminary findings into treatment recommendations.
Standards we apply
- Prefer peer-reviewed sources and clinical trial registries over anecdote.
- Note conflicts of interest and methodological limitations plainly.
- Use neutral, plain language so conclusions are clear but tentative where appropriate.
Who this is for
This resource is aimed at people affected by multiple sclerosis, their supporters, and readers trying to assess claims about ibogaine with care. For readers who want an overview of the site's scope and services we offer guidance and context — including short descriptions of how third‑party programs are described — and we link to a concise listing under our services index where readers can find topic-aligned summaries and external program descriptions.
Editorial principles
- Scientific restraint — we do not overstate what limited evidence can show.
- Plain language — complex findings are presented clearly and without jargon.
- Safety awareness — potential risks are highlighted alongside any reported outcomes.
- Independence — we avoid affiliation claims and disclose limitations of our reporting.