Disclosures
How this is funded, and what we turn down.
Every comparison site in this category says it is independent. The claim is only meaningful if you can see the money. Here it is, including what we have not built yet.
| Revenue source | Status | Conflict, and how it is handled |
|---|---|---|
| Reader subscriptions | Planned | None. Readers pay us; nobody we rate does. |
| Newsletter sponsorship | Planned | Accepted only from categories we do not rate. No lab, testing platform, supplement, telehealth, or peptide seller may sponsor, at any price. |
| Licensing the registry to clinics and benefits platforms | Planned | Licensees receive the same data as everyone else and cannot influence it. Licensing does not confer favourable treatment, and licensees who are also rated remain rated on the published method. |
| Display advertising | Not currently used | If ever introduced, it would run only on guides and news, never on registry or audit pages, and endemic advertisers we rate would be excluded. |
| Affiliate commissions | Refused | We take no affiliate revenue from any company we rate. This is the largest revenue source available to a site like this, and declining it is the point of the site. |
The rule, in one sentence
White Mirror does not accept money from any company it rates. Not as an affiliate, not as a sponsor, not for placement, not for review, and not for removal.
Why we decline affiliate revenue
Lab testing and telehealth affiliate programmes are the obvious way to monetise a site like this, and they pay well. A single telehealth signup can be worth more than thousands of ad impressions. Nearly every comparison page you will find in this category is built on them.
The problem is not that affiliate revenue is dishonest. It is that it makes a specific and important claim impossible to verify: that we would tell you not to buy something. Once a page earns more when you purchase, no disclosure restores that credibility. Since the entire value of this registry rests on being believed when we say a marketed range is unsupported, that revenue is not available to us.
What would compromise us
- Accepting sponsorship from a company whose products appear in the Panel Audit or whose marketed ranges appear in the registry
- Allowing a licensee to influence, preview, or embargo a rating
- Publishing a marker count supplied by a company as though it were independently confirmed
- Taking money from any seller or prescriber of the compounds covered on the Peptide Desk, under any structure
If any of these ever happens, it belongs on this page before it appears anywhere else on the site.
Editorial independence
No company covered here receives advance notice of a rating, an opportunity to review copy before publication, or the ability to remove itself from the audit. Corrections are published with a dated note rather than edited in silently.
Not medical advice
White Mirror publishes reference information. It does not diagnose, treat, cure, or prevent any condition, and it is not a substitute for a clinician who knows your history. Laboratory reference intervals vary between laboratories and assays, so interpret your results against the range printed on your own report.
Regulatory and pricing information changes. Confirm anything time-sensitive against a primary source before acting on it.
The Mirror Brief
One email when a reference range changes, a panel claim is corrected, or a regulatory status actually moves, not when something is merely proposed. No sponsors from any company we rate.
Unsubscribe anytime. We never sell or share your address.