Corrections and Clarifications
Help Us Make This Better
This site was built during an active fight against invasive aspergillosis… researched and written between doses, through brain fog, on a budget of zero dollars and whatever cognitive capacity was available on any given day. The science we are aware of is cited and the reasoning is there, but this started as one person’s work, and one person can’t know everything.
There are things on this site that are incomplete. There are probably things that could be explained more clearly. There may be mechanisms we partially understood or applied slightly sideways. There are almost certainly relevant studies, pathways, or clinical observations we simply didn’t find yet.
We know this. That’s why this page exists. If you’ve noticed something that could be clearer, more complete, or more accurate, we genuinely want to hear about it — because the patients who rely on this information deserve the best version of it we can collectively build.
What’s Helpful to Send
This site makes every effort to be accurate, thorough, and transparent about what is established and what is still emerging. “Every effort” isn’t the same as “perfect,” and the people reading this deserve the most complete and accurate information we can collectively produce.
Clarifications
“The way you described X might give people the impression that Y, but it’s actually more nuanced than that.” Maybe the mechanism is right but the framing could be tighter. Maybe there’s a qualifier that would make a statement more precise. Maybe a section reads like a certainty when it’s really a strong probability. These notes make the whole resource more trustworthy.
Additions
“You covered A and B but didn’t mention C, which is relevant because…” A pathway we didn’t consider. A comorbidity intersection we missed. A compound interaction worth noting. A newer study that adds to the picture. Some of the most valuable contributions won’t be corrections at all — they’ll be things we didn’t know to include.
Corrections
We cited a study wrong. We attributed a mechanism to the wrong enzyme. We got a drug interaction backwards. A number is off, a name is wrong, a PMID doesn’t match the claim. If something is factually incorrect, we want to fix it. No ego about it.
Safety observations
A possible compound interaction we didn’t address. A dosing consideration worth flagging. A contraindication that deserves mention. We want the information on this site to be as thorough as possible so patients can have better-informed conversations with their doctors. More complete documentation benefits everyone.
Context and nuance
“This is accurate for X but doesn’t apply the same way in patients with Y.” Clinical experience often reveals things that published studies haven’t caught up to yet. If your experience treating patients has shown you something that adds important context to what’s on the site, that’s exactly the kind of contribution that makes this resource real rather than theoretical.
A Note on How This Site Handles Uncertainty
Throughout the site, we distinguish between established science and emerging possibilities. When we write “published data suggests,” “pharmacologically plausible but unconfirmed in human trials,” or “this claim remains unverified,” we’re being transparent about where the evidence stands. We include preliminary and mechanistic science alongside established clinical data because patients making treatment decisions right now can’t wait for the Phase III trial that may never be funded.
If something is clearly labeled as preliminary and your note is “this hasn’t been proven” — we agree, and we already said so. What would be helpful is if you can tell us why the preliminary data might be wrong, or point us to contradictory evidence, or flag a reason the mechanism might not translate from in vitro to in vivo. That kind of engagement makes the site better.
We’re not defensive about this. We’d just rather spend our collective energy on the stuff that actually moves the needle.
How to Send It
However works best for you. A few sentences is fine. A detailed technical analysis is also fine. Whatever level of detail you have time for.
Submit a clarification or correction
A citation helps but isn’t required. Clinical experience and professional knowledge are valid. If you’ve seen it in practice, say so.
What happens after you submit
We read everything. Clear factual errors and safety concerns get addressed as fast as possible. Clarifications and additions get incorporated as the site evolves. If something is more complex and we want to understand your perspective better, we may reach out.
If we use your contribution, we’re happy to credit you however you’d like — by name, by credentials, or anonymously. Your call.
Every clarification, correction, and addition that improves this site makes it more useful for the patients and practitioners who depend on it. Thank you for taking the time.