Medical review
Effective September 17, 2026. Last updated October 3, 2026.
A "Medically reviewed by" line on a guide means that a licensed clinician read the full text, checked the clinical claims against the cited sources, and approved the wording. The line shows the reviewer's name, credentials, and the date of the review. Guides without that line have not been clinically reviewed, and a human editor has not yet checked every claim in them against its cited source.
Where review stands today
None of our 29 guides has been medically reviewed yet, so none carries the line. A guide that has been reviewed will say so in its byline, just under its title, with the reviewer's name and the date. A human editor has not yet checked every claim in a guide without a review line against its cited source, and no clinician has signed off on it. Automated checks confirm that every source number such a guide cites is in its source list and screen its wording, as our editorial policy describes, but they cannot judge whether a claim is true. New medical content carries no review line until a reviewer has approved it. This page fills in as reviews are completed: reviewer profiles appear below, and the count at the start of this section updates itself each time the site is built.
What the line means
The line names one clinician and one date. It means that on that date the clinician read the whole guide, checked its clinical statements against the sources it cites, and approved the wording as published. The site cannot show the line unless a guide records both a reviewer and a review date, and a reviewer's profile must list their credentials before it can be used. The line links to the reviewer's profile on this page.
The review date and the guide's Updated date are separate. When we change a reviewed guide, its Updated date changes. When the change touches medical content, we will ask the reviewer to review it again, and the review date will show when the latest review took place.
What a reviewer checks
A reviewer reads the guide as a whole and checks, against its sources:
- that descriptions of the body, the blood, and the procedure are accurate;
- that each study's type, size, and limitations are stated fairly, and that no result is described as more than it shows;
- that safety information, contraindications, and the signs that call for care are correct and clearly stated;
- that no sentence implies a benefit or a cure the sources do not support;
- that nothing in the guide reads as advice to a particular person.
A reviewer can ask for changes, and the line appears only once they approve the final text. If a reviewer does not approve a guide, it does not carry the line.
What review does not mean
Review is not an endorsement of EBO2, of any clinic in our directory, or of ozone therapy generally. A reviewer checks a guide. They do not check our clinic listings, the prices and other facts clinics state, or our reports, tools, and downloads, and they have not evaluated you. A reviewed guide is still general information, not medical advice, and our medical disclaimer applies to it in full. Review also cannot settle what the evidence leaves open: when the studies are small or uncontrolled, a reviewed guide says so, and a reviewer's approval does not make the evidence any stronger.
How reviewers are chosen
We have not yet named a reviewer. Each reviewer must hold an active license to practice, and we confirm that license through the state licensing board's public lookup before their first review. A reviewer's profile shows their name, credentials, title, the state where they are licensed, and a short biography, so that you can look the license up yourself. We ask each reviewer to tell us about any financial or professional ties to clinics, device makers, or ozone-therapy organizations, and we disclose on their profile any tie that bears on what they review. We do not choose reviewers for their views on EBO2; we ask them to hold each guide to its sources.
How reviewers are paid
Reviewers are compensated for their time at a flat rate that does not depend on what the article concludes. A reviewer is paid the same whether they approve a guide, ask for changes, or decline to approve it. No clinic, device maker, or other company we write about pays for a review or has any say in who reviews a guide. The site itself is paid for by its operator, and our About page explains how it is funded. We describe the arrangement here so that you can judge it for yourself, and if it ever changes, this page will say so in its change history.
Reviewers
There are no reviewer profiles yet. They will appear here as guides complete clinical review. Each profile shows the reviewer's name and credentials, their title, the state where they hold a license, a short biography, and links where you can learn more about them. You can check a license yourself on the website of the licensing board in that state; most boards offer a free search by name. If you think something in a reviewed guide is wrong, tell us through the contact form. We check every report against the cited sources and correct substantive errors as our editorial policy describes.
Contact
Questions about medical review: use the contact form or write to EBO2.com, 1968 S. Coast Hwy, #1921, Laguna Beach, CA 92651, United States.
Change history
- October 3, 2026: corrected what a guide without a review line has had. A human editor has not yet checked every claim in our guides against its cited source, and our automated checks confirm citations and screen wording without judging whether a claim is true. The page said before that our editors had checked those guides against their sources.
- October 2, 2026: expanded every section. Added where review stands, what the line means, what a reviewer checks, how reviewers are chosen and paid, and what each reviewer profile shows.
- September 17, 2026: first published.