Methodology

Source hierarchy

We weight sources roughly in this order:

1. Systematic reviews and meta-analyses from peer-reviewed journals, accessed via PubMed Central or PubMed.
2. Randomized controlled trials, especially the pivotal trials that led to FDA approval for specific treatments.
3. Specialty consensus statements from the International Hyperhidrosis Society, the American Academy of Dermatology, and the Indian Association of Dermatologists, Venereologists and Leprologists.
4. Major institutional summaries: Mayo Clinic, Cleveland Clinic, the NHS, and NIH MedlinePlus.
5. StatPearls (NCBI Bookshelf) for accessible clinical summaries.
6. FDA labeling and prescribing information for drug-specific claims.
7. Manufacturer-provided clinical data, used only when corroborated by independent sources.

Patient forums (Reddit, hyperhidrosis-specific communities) inform what questions we cover. They do not inform what we recommend.

How we write an article

1. Identify the question. Either from keyword research, a reader email, or a recurring search query a member of the team has run themselves.
2. Pull the literature. Search PubMed Central for the topic, prioritize systematic reviews from the last 10 years, then read down to the relevant primary trials.
3. Cross-check with specialty bodies. Confirm what the IHHS and AAD currently say. If their guidance is older than the most recent literature, note the gap.
4. Write the article. Plain language. Cite each substantive claim. Acknowledge uncertainty explicitly when the evidence is mixed or thin.
5. Stress test against personal experience. Where someone on the team has direct experience with the treatment, condition, or product, we use that experience to flag where the published guidance diverges from the lived reality. This is not a substitute for the literature; it is a sanity check on its completeness.
6. Cite everything. The Sources section at the bottom of every article links the primary papers, specialty resources, and institutional summaries we used.

What "we are not clinicians" actually means

We do not diagnose. We do not prescribe. We do not provide medical advice. We summarize what the literature says, in plain English, with specific citations so anyone can check our work. When a decision needs a doctor — and many do — we say so directly, with criteria for when it matters.

We are also wary of the failure mode where a research-aggregation site implicitly takes on the authority of the sources it cites. The literature gets things wrong. Specialty bodies revise their guidance. We try to flag where the consensus is genuinely settled (axillary Botox works for HDSS 3-4 patients, this is not controversial) versus where it is contested or evolving (the exact mechanism of primary focal hyperhidrosis is still under investigation).

What we do when the evidence is thin

For some questions readers send us, the published evidence is genuinely sparse. Examples: best socks for sweaty feet, optimal nightwear fabric for hot sleepers, social strategies for visible hand sweating in dating contexts. For these we do three things:

• State that the published evidence is limited.
• Explain the underlying physical or material science to the extent it is known (sock fabric wicking properties, fabric thermal conductivity).
• Offer practical guidance based on direct testing, with an explicit "this is what worked for us" framing rather than a citation it does not have.

How we handle commercial relationships

We do not have any. No display ads, no sponsored content, no affiliate links to antiperspirant brands or treatment providers. The one commercial connection on this site is openly disclosed: we are also building Sweat Seal, a topical antiperspirant. Our editorial policy and how we handle that conflict are at /editorial-policy.

How often we update

Each article carries a "Last updated" date. Hub pages get a full re-read every quarter. Spoke articles get updated when new clinical evidence changes the recommendation, when a reader flags an error, or when the linked sources have moved or been retracted.

Where we will not stretch

We will not write about conditions adjacent to sweating that we do not understand well. Pheochromocytoma, carcinoid syndrome, autonomic dysreflexia — these can present with sweating but are outside what we cover beyond the basic "if you have these red flags, see a specialist." Same for psychiatric conditions presenting with sweating: we cover the patient-experience side because we have it; we do not write authoritatively on the underlying psychiatry.