| # | Question | What “yes” looks like |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Can I find the original source? | Link to study, FDA/EMA label, WHO/CDC/NIDA report — not a screenshot or repost. |
| 2 | Who published it and why? | Named organization with relevant expertise; funding and conflicts disclosed. |
| 3 | What study type is it? | Systematic review > RCT > cohort > case report > animal/cell > anecdote. Method matches the strength of the claim. |
| 4 | Who was studied, at what dose, for how long? | Population, dose, route, duration stated. No jump from mice or 12 people to “everyone”. |
| 5 | Association or causation? | Authors say “linked to” vs “causes” correctly; confounders discussed. |
| 6 | How big is the effect, and how certain? | Absolute numbers + confidence intervals, not just “300% increase” or “miracle”. |
| 7 | Is it current and local? | Date checked; law, formulary, or service info matches your jurisdiction and year. |
| 8 | Can I verify it elsewhere? | Second primary source, guideline, or agency says the same. Single viral post = unresolved. |
| 9 | What would change the conclusion? | Limitations listed; authors state what replication would be needed. |
| 10 | What is the safe next step? | Points to clinician, pharmacist, poison control, or helpline — not to a seller or “try it”. |
3 red flags that fail instantly
- No source trail — “studies show” with no link, DOI, or document name.
- Miracle language — “100% safe”, “no side effects”, “doctors don’t want you to know”, countdown timers, discount codes.
- Instructions to buy, dose, or evade — vendor names, payment tips, purification, law-evasion. Legitimate education never does this.
Worked example (60 seconds)
Claim: “X cures Y, study proves it.”
Check: click through → n=14 mice, 7 days, no human data, funded by seller, no replication. Score 2/10 → label: Preliminary, do not share as fact. Compare with PubMed systematic review or NIDA.
Where to verify fast
- Medicine labels: FDA, EMA
- Literature: PubMed
- Public health: WHO, CDC, NIDA
- Help now: Poison Control, Find a Helpline
Deeper method: How we evaluate substance information · Source library · Emergency planning.
Cite / link to this page (helps us stay independent)
<a href="https://drughub-market-dark.org/checklist">Substance claim checklist — DrugHub Research Library</a>
APA: DrugHub Research Library (2026). Substance claim checklist: 10 questions before you believe or share. https://drughub-market-dark.org/checklist
Added us to your directory? Email editorial@drughub-market-dark.org with subject "Link added" - we verify weekly.
Corrections
Found an outdated source? Send URL + quote + better source to corrections. Material fixes are logged in About → Correction log.