Editorial Principles

Every article we publish is written for one purpose: to give men navigating erectile dysfunction, post-surgical recovery, and a wide range of related clinical conditions the most accurate, evidence-based information available. That includes men managing diabetic ED, cardiac patients, those on androgen deprivation therapy, men with Peyronie’s disease, neurological conditions, and others. This page explains the standards every piece of content on this site is held to, and why those standards exist.

1. Produced to a consistent editorial standard

Every article on this site is produced under consistent editorial oversight. Clinical content is written by experienced medical content specialists, reviewed by a licensed physician with a directly relevant specialty before publication, and fact-checked against primary clinical sources. The reviewer’s name and credentials appear on every article they review.

Our reviewers’ role is not cosmetic. They assess clinical accuracy, flag outdated claims, and confirm that the article aligns with current treatment guidelines from bodies including the American Urological Association and the European Association of Urology. No clinical article is published until that review is complete and any flagged issues are resolved.

2. Evidence-based at every level

Every significant clinical claim in our content is supported by peer-reviewed evidence. We reference primary sources - published studies, clinical trials, and established clinical guidelines - rather than secondary aggregators or general health websites.

Where evidence is evolving or contested, we say so. We do not present one side of a scientific debate as settled fact. Our goal is to give readers the most accurate picture available, including the limits of current knowledge.

All articles carry a “last reviewed” date. When clinical guidelines change or new high- evidence studies are published, we update the relevant content.

3. How we cite our sources

Where a specific statistic, study finding, or clinical claim is made, we link directly from that claim to its source. This means you can follow any referenced figure to the original paper or guideline without hunting through a reference list.

Each article also carries a sources section at the bottom listing the primary studies and guidelines cited, including access dates for web-based resources. This gives readers - and our medical reviewers - a clear audit trail for everything the article relies on.

Not every sentence requires a citation. Where we describe well-established clinical consensus or explain a mechanism that is not in dispute, we write from that established understanding without attaching a source to every line. Where a claim is specific, statistical, or based on a particular study, it is cited.

Example: "Studies suggest that between 40% and 70% of men experience erectile dysfunction following radical prostatectomy" links directly to the source of that figure. The same study appears in the sources section at the bottom of the article.

The sources we draw on most regularly include:

• PubMed / NCBI
• AUA Guidelines
• EAU Guidelines
• New England Journal of Medicine
• Journal of Sexual Medicine
• Journal of Urology
• BJU International
• NIH
• FDA.gov
• CDC.gov

4. Written clearly, for a non-specialist reader

Our readers are not medical professionals. They are men - and in many cases their partners - navigating serious clinical situations and looking for accurate information they can actually use. They deserve content that treats them as intelligent adults without requiring a medical degree to follow.

We write in plain language without sacrificing clinical accuracy. Medical terminology is used where it is the correct term, and explained where it needs to be. We do not oversimplify, and we do not pad articles with content that does not serve the reader.

5. Editorial and commercial are kept separate

Lynk Performance sells products. Our editorial content exists independently of that. The people who write and review our clinical articles do not answer to the commercial side of the business, and what we sell has no bearing on what we write. Clinical conclusions, source selection, and evidence standards are determined by the evidence - not by what we stock.

Where our articles reference clinical interventions - including vacuum erection devices - it is because those interventions are clinically relevant to the reader’s situation, not because we carry them.

6. How we handle updates and corrections

Clinical knowledge moves. Guidelines are revised, new studies are published, and what was accurate at the time of writing may need to be updated. All articles carry a “last reviewed” date, and we review content on a rolling basis - immediately when a relevant guideline changes, and at minimum annually for every published article.

If an error is identified in a published article - whether by a reader, a reviewer, or our editorial team - it is corrected promptly. Substantive corrections are noted on the article with a brief description of what changed and when. We do not silently edit clinical content.

If you believe something we’ve published is inaccurate, we want to know. You can reach us through the contact page.

Our medical reviewers

Every clinical article on this site is reviewed by a licensed physician before publication. Our reviewers hold board certification in directly relevant specialties - urology, sexual medicine,or oncology. Their credentials, affiliations, and relationship with Lynk Performance are disclosed on their Medical Board of Advisors page.