1Examine
examine.com — best overall starting point for a fitness enthusiast
Examine analyzes and summarizes research on supplements and nonpharmaceutical interventions, including effectiveness, safety, and dosage — particularly useful when investigating whether a supplement is worth taking for a specific goal.
S Source
A research-summary resource. Its value is translating a body of research into a form a nonspecialist can use — an isolated study can mislead, while a pattern across studies is harder to fake.
A Authority
Judge it by the quality and transparency of the analysis: does the page link conclusions to evidence and separate stronger findings from uncertain ones? For any ingredient, ask who was studied, what was measured, whether the benefit is big enough to matter, whether the dose matches the studied dose, and whether side effects are explained.
L Location
A standalone nutrition-and-supplement research site, not a government or university domain. That doesn't make it less accurate — it means evaluating its methods and disclosures rather than trusting the domain name. Check the current access model and commercial disclosures.
T Timeliness
Check the last substantive update of the specific page you use. Older high-quality reviews can still serve for established ingredients; for newer or heavily marketed ones, recency matters more.
Best practical use: start with "Does this ingredient improve strength or muscle growth in someone like me?" — then cross-check safety with NIH ODS and sporting relevance with AIS.
Overall judgment: our first choice for an accessible, research-focused overview.
2NIH Office of Dietary Supplements
ods.od.nih.gov — best for a trustworthy safety and evidence baseline
NIH ODS publishes a dedicated exercise-and-athletic-performance fact sheet with an extensive reference list, plus fact sheets on common vitamins, minerals, and plant-based ingredients.
S Source
The Office of Dietary Supplements within the U.S. National Institutes of Health. An excellent baseline when you want public-health information rather than marketing.
A Authority
Traceable references to research and professional guidance on creatine, protein, caffeine, beta-alanine, and more. The references let you check where a claim originated instead of just accepting it.
L Location
A U.S. government domain, presented as educational material rather than a sales page. Low direct product-selling pressure — but U.S. regulatory descriptions may not apply exactly elsewhere, and population guidance can't account for your full medical history.
T Timeliness
References span multiple years, including older foundational research — not inherently a problem. The key question: could newer evidence materially change the conclusion? Check the page's update info and compare with a recent review on evolving topics.
Best practical use: "What evidence supports this ingredient? What risks should I investigate? Am I treating a deficiency, or expecting a performance boost?" — correcting inadequate intake and boosting performance beyond adequacy are different questions.
Overall judgment: our strongest general reference for cautious, well-documented supplement information.
The AIS framework explicitly asks whether there is evidence that a supplement "works" — focused on evidence-based use of supplements and sports foods within high-performance sport.
S Source
The Australian Institute of Sport, hosted by the Australian Sports Commission. Designed around sporting use rather than general wellness claims — strong for separating a credible performance application from something that merely sounds athletic.
A Authority
Draws on sports-nutrition expertise and international work on dietary supplements in high-performance sport; NIH ODS references its classification system. Read it by asking: what situation is this for, what outcome should it improve, does that resemble my training, and what are the risks?
L Location
An Australian government sports site focused on high-performance sport. An elite athlete may reasonably chase a small gain that means little to a recreational lifter — don't treat athlete-focused guidance as universal instruction.
T Timeliness
Check the current ingredient guidance at the source rather than relying on an old screenshot or a classification quoted in a blog. A supplement's category and use conditions should always be verified live.
Best practical use: "Does this supplement have an evidence-based role in my type of exercise, and under what circumstances?"
Overall judgment: our first choice for practical sporting relevance, especially for competitive athletes.
The best way to use ISSN material is to locate its position statements and read the associated scientific publication — the NIH fact sheet references ISSN publications on creatine, protein, caffeine, beta-alanine, and HMB.
S Source
Identifiable sports-nutrition publications with named authors and references. A strong source type when you want to go beyond a consumer summary and understand the scientific rationale.
A Authority
"Position statement" doesn't mean beyond debate. Evaluate how each paper handles conflicting findings and study quality — and check whether it separates acute effects from long-term adaptations, mechanisms from demonstrated benefit, and statistical significance from practical improvement.
L Location
For consequential claims, use the full journal article — not a society webpage or press release. Read each paper's funding and competing-interest disclosures; an industry relationship doesn't automatically invalidate research, but it's relevant context.
T Timeliness
Timeliness must be evaluated paper by paper. Before using a statement for a dose or protocol, check whether a newer version or substantial subsequent review exists.
Best practical use: "What is the detailed scientific argument behind this recommendation?"
Overall judgment: a valuable deeper-reading resource; less convenient for a beginner who wants a quick answer.
5Operation Supplement Safety
opss.org — best as a supplement-risk cross-check
OPSS is a military-oriented supplement-information resource — included here for a different purpose than the others: risk screening should accompany efficacy research. It also directs readers to NIH ODS fact sheets for common ingredients.
S Source
A supplement-safety resource with a military audience. Useful as an additional safety perspective, particularly for unfamiliar ingredients or aggressive performance claims.
A Authority
Its referral to NIH ODS provides a route to well-documented evidence. For any specific warning, look for supporting references, a clear explanation of the risk, and the date.
L Location
The military context matters: a substance can be a service-policy problem as well as a health concern. Civilian legality, military permission, and anti-doping eligibility are separate questions — and absence from a warning list is never proof of safety.
T Timeliness
Safety information changes as new products, ingredients, and adverse-event reports emerge. Check the date of any individual warning and its underlying policy.
Best practical use: "What risks or policy issues should I investigate before taking this product?"
Overall judgment: a useful safety complement to the first four.