Our standard

Every recommendation traces back to published evidence.

We build on the work of the major oncology bodies and the peer-reviewed literature behind it, and we show our sources.

How we decide what belongs here

We start from the strongest evidence available and work down, and we're clear about which is which.

Randomized trials and meta-analyses

The highest bar when available.

Systematic reviews and guidelines

International clinical guidance and the reviews behind it.

Expert consensus statements

Reasoned practice from oncology societies.

Mechanism and plausibility

Included only when useful, and clearly labeled as such.

We show our work

For each recommendation, we point to the specific study, guideline, or mechanism behind it, and we label the strength of the evidence honestly. When the evidence is weak or mixed, we say so plainly. We would rather lose a sale than overstate a benefit.

Evidence-supportedBacked by clinical trials or guidelines.
EmergingPromising, but still being studied.
Expert opinionReasonable practice, not yet proven.
Traditional / comfortUsed for comfort, with no efficacy claim.
Evidence-supported

Used when a recommendation is backed by clinical trials, systematic reviews, meta-analyses, or clinical guidelines.

Sources

Peer-reviewed literature and guidance bodies such as MASCC, NCCN, ASCO, ESMO, and ESPEN.

Emerging

Used when an approach is promising, but still being studied, or when the evidence base is not yet mature.

Sources

Published studies, reviews, and mechanisms labeled without overstating certainty.

Expert opinion

Used for reasonable practice drawn from consensus statements or oncology-supportive-care experience.

Sources

Consensus statements and guidance from oncology and supportive-care organizations.

Traditional / comfort

Used for comfort-oriented items only, with no efficacy claim and no suggestion that they treat cancer or treatment effects.

Sources

Clearly labeled comfort rationale, separate from clinical-evidence claims.

The guidance we build on

Our content and product standards draw on the supportive-care guidance of the major oncology organizations.

MASCC NCCN ASCO ESMO ESPEN ACS NCI SIOG ONS

Honest language

"Clinically studied" is not the same as "clinically proven," and we don't blur the two. You will never see miracle-cure claims, fear-based marketing, or any suggestion that a product treats cancer.

Our products support comfort and quality of life alongside medical care, never in place of it.

Independent by design

LifeAtomiX has no institutional affiliation and answers to no sponsor. When a relationship could shape what we recommend, such as an affiliate link or supplier arrangement, we disclose it. Our loyalty is to patients and to the evidence.

Who's behind it

LifeAtomiX was created by a medical physicist in radiation oncology, out of a conviction that supportive care should begin at diagnosis. Our clinical advisory board is in formation, and our standards will keep rising as it grows.