Norene’s Farmacy Evidence Rating: How We Grade Herbal Claims

Evidence first. Product second. That only works if customers can see what we mean by “evidence.” This is the rating system Norene’s Farmacy uses across herb reports, condition pages, comparisons, and product guidance.

Human clinical evidence

Multiple human studies, randomized trials, systematic reviews, or meta-analyses support the specific outcome being discussed. This still does not automatically mean the herb is equivalent to a medication or appropriate for everyone.

Early human evidence

Human studies exist, but they may be small, short, inconsistent, product-specific, or not independently replicated.

Mixed human evidence

Human studies point in different directions, or positive findings are not consistent across analyses, populations, doses, or preparations.

Preclinical evidence

The claim is supported mainly by cell, laboratory, or animal research. Preclinical findings can justify more research, but they do not prove a clinical benefit in people.

Traditional use

The herb has a documented history of cultural or traditional use. Traditional use matters, but tradition and clinical proof are not the same thing.

Insufficient evidence

There is not enough reliable human research to support the claim.

How we apply the rating

We rate the specific claim, not the herb as a whole. One herb can have stronger evidence for one outcome and weak evidence for another. Product form, dose, extract, population, study quality, safety, and medication interactions all matter.

Norene’s Farmacy does not use an evidence rating as a disease-treatment claim. It is a transparency tool.