Editorial Standards
Shameless Path is a community-driven resource for people living with herpes, HIV, HPV, molluscum, and other sexually transmitted infections. Because health information shapes real decisions, we hold our content to standards we'd want for ourselves and our loved ones.
How we research
Every article begins with sources we trust — peer-reviewed medical journals (PubMed, NEJM, JAMA), recognized public-health authorities (CDC, WHO, NIH), and clinical practice guidelines from professional medical societies. We do not cite blogs, forums, or anonymous social posts as primary medical evidence.
For emerging treatments (vaccines, gene therapies, antivirals in trial), we name the trial phase, the trial identifier, and link to the registry record so readers can verify the claim themselves.
How we write
Our writers approach STIs from two angles: clinical accuracy and lived experience. Many of our contributors live with the conditions they cover. Personal stories are clearly marked and never substitute for medical guidance.
We avoid stigmatizing language. We do not refer to anyone as "dirty", "clean", "positive" vs "negative" as identities, or other framing that pathologizes people instead of conditions.
How we medically review
Every clinical article on Shameless Path moves through a defined review pipeline before its medical-review status is upgraded. At the top of each article you will see one of two badges:
- Medically Reviewed — a licensed clinician has read the article and signed off. The reviewer's name, credentials, and the date of the most recent review appear directly below the badge.
- Pending medical review — the article is sourced from current peer-reviewed literature and public-health guidance, but has not yet completed a clinician review. We choose to publish in this state so the information is available; we choose to label it honestly so you can decide how much weight to give it. The pending state is temporary; clinician review is in progress.
When reviewers do read an article, they check that:
- Medical facts match current peer-reviewed evidence
- Drug names, dosages, and contraindications are correct
- Transmission and prevention statements align with CDC/WHO guidance
- The article does not give specific medical advice for individual cases
- Risk language is calibrated and not sensationalized
Reviewers can request rewrites, citations, or removal of any claim. A reviewer's sign-off is mandatory before the Medically Reviewed badge is applied — we never apply it speculatively.
If you would prefer to wait for a fully-reviewed version of a pending article, the "Last medically reviewed" date will appear at the top once the review is complete. You can also email [email protected] to request a specific article be prioritized for review.
How we update
STI research moves quickly. Vaccines progress through trials, drug combinations get approved, transmission data gets refined. We re-review every clinical article at least once per year, and sooner when major new evidence emerges (new FDA approval, large clinical trial result, updated CDC guidance).
When we update an article, the "Last reviewed" date at the top changes, and the article's schema reflects the new modification date so search engines surface the current version.
Corrections policy
If a reader (or anyone) spots an error, we want to know. Email [email protected] with the article URL and the issue. We respond within 5 business days, and if a correction is warranted we update the article and note the correction in the article's edit history.
What we are not
Shameless Path is not a substitute for medical care. We provide information and community — not diagnosis, prescription, or treatment. If you think you may have an STI, get tested. If you have one, work with a qualified clinician on a treatment plan. We exist to make those steps less lonely, not to replace them.
These standards are maintained by the Shameless Path editorial team and apply to all content published after May 2026. Older content is being progressively re-reviewed against these standards.