Skip to main content
VidaBeacon

Corrections & Updates

Health information should be accountable. When we get something wrong, we fix it in the open — and we keep a record here.

Our corrections policy

We aim to be accurate, current, and honest. When a reader, editor, or source review surfaces a factual error, we correct it promptly and note what changed. Substantive corrections — anything that affects the meaning or guidance of an article — are logged on this page with the date and, where relevant, a link to the affected content.

We distinguish three kinds of change: corrections (fixing a factual error), updates (adding new evidence or refreshing sources), and clarifications (rewording something that could be misread). Minor typo and formatting fixes are not logged.

For how our content is researched, reviewed, and kept current, see our editorial process.

Spotted an error?

If something on VidaBeacon looks inaccurate or out of date, please tell us. Include the page and what you think is wrong — we read every message.

Report a correction

Correction log

  1. Update

    Refreshed outdated source links across older guides

    During a routine audit we found that several outbound citations pointed to pages that authoritative sources (including the FDA, NIH, NHS, and Harvard Health) had since moved or restructured. We repaired each link to the current, same-authority source so readers can still reach the underlying evidence.

  2. Update

    Expanded shorter guides with additional sourced detail

    A batch of briefer articles was expanded with more complete, plain-language explanations and refreshed references to current primary sources and guidelines. The core guidance did not change; the articles are now more thorough, and their last-reviewed dates were updated.

  3. Clarification

    Corrected how we describe our own review status

    Our About and Editorial Process pages previously implied that articles were written and reviewed by credentialed professionals. Because independent clinician review is still being established, we corrected that language to describe our content as editorially researched and reviewed by our health team, with clinician review noted as in progress.

    View the affected page →
  4. Correction

    Removed unverified “medically reviewed” labels site-wide

    Some articles carried a “medically reviewed” badge that was not backed by an actual review from a credentialed clinician. We removed those labels everywhere they appeared and will only reinstate a “medically reviewed” mark on an article once a qualified clinician has genuinely reviewed it. Until then, articles are clearly marked as reviewed by our editorial team.