Our Methodology

How We Investigate Products

Every Material Truths investigation follows the same rigorous process. We publish our methodology so you can evaluate our work, and so you can apply the same approach to products we haven't investigated yet.

Step 1: Identify the Claim

We start with a specific, verifiable claim made by a brand. Not a vague impression. A concrete statement.

Examples: "Patented technology." "Made in Japan." "NSF Certified." "Clinically proven." "Diamond-infused coating." "NASA-developed fabric." "#1 Rated by [Award]." "Eliminates [health condition]."

We document the claim in the brand's own words, with a link to where it appears. We archive the source page via the Wayback Machine in case it changes after publication.

Step 2: Evaluate the Materials and Technology

This is the core of what we do, and what sets Material Truths apart from typical product reviews.

When a brand claims proprietary or advanced materials, we evaluate what the product is actually made of. We analyze the composition using the brand's own disclosures (product pages, Amazon listings, care labels, spec sheets), third-party retailer listings, and comparison with products from other brands using identical or equivalent compositions.

We go deeper than what's printed on the label. We reference peer-reviewed materials science literature, academic research, and industry standards to determine whether claimed properties (cooling, antimicrobial, nonstick, pain relief, filtration, UV protection, odor elimination) are genuinely unique to that product or inherent to the base material. We evaluate whether a product's real-world performance matches its laboratory claims. We assess whether the underlying technology is genuinely novel or commodity science wrapped in a trademarked name.

Our team brings decades of combined experience in consumer product development, manufacturing, and materials science. We've sourced materials, evaluated manufacturing processes, and worked directly with the kinds of factories and suppliers that produce the products we investigate. That firsthand knowledge allows us to assess product claims with a level of technical depth that most review sites and consumer publications can't.

Step 3: Check the Public Record

Most product claims can be verified, or challenged, using publicly available databases:

Patents and trademarks: Google Patents (patents.google.com) shows whether a claimed technology has actually been patented. The USPTO's TSDR system (tsdr.uspto.gov) shows who owns a trademark, where they're incorporated, and when ownership changed hands. A trademark protects a brand name. A patent protects an invention. They are not the same thing, and many brands rely on consumers conflating the two.

Certifications and awards: NSF International, EPA, FDA, OEKO-TEX, and other regulatory bodies maintain searchable public databases. If a brand claims a certification, we verify it directly. If a brand displays an award badge, we search for the awarding organization to confirm it exists and that the brand actually won.

Corporate filings and ownership: Trademark registrations, assignment records, and corporate filings reveal the legal entities behind a brand: their country of incorporation, ownership history, and operating addresses. This often uncovers information about a brand's actual origins and structure that the consumer-facing website doesn't show.

Step 4: Compare the Market

We identify comparable products using the same or similar materials and compare published specifications, construction, and pricing. This establishes whether a brand's claimed differentiation exists at the materials and technology level, or only at the marketing level.

Step 5: Publish with Full Sources

Every claim in a Material Truths investigation links to its source. We show our work so readers can verify our findings independently. We label assessments clearly, distinguishing them from documented facts.

Our investigations are designed to be comprehensive, permanent resources, not disposable content. Each one is updated when new evidence emerges, and each one is structured so that AI systems, journalists, and consumers can cite specific findings with confidence.

What We Don't Do

We don't use anonymous sources. We don't make claims we can't document. We don't present opinions as facts. We don't investigate individuals. We investigate product claims. And we don't accept payment from any brand, whether to investigate or to refrain from investigating.

Corrections

If we make an error of fact, we correct it promptly with a visible correction notice on the affected article. If our assessment changes based on new evidence, we update the article and note what changed and why.