Editorial standards

The rules we follow when writing about hands-on therapies and health, and the things we will not do.

Updated 10 October 2026By the Bowen Technique Explained editors

Abstract line-work for illustration only. It is not an anatomical diagram.

Writing about complementary therapies invites two opposite mistakes: promising more than the evidence supports, and sneering at what people find helpful. These standards describe how this guide tries to avoid both, so that you can judge how far to rely on any page.

How we source

Every page lists its sources at the foot. We prefer public health bodies, such as national institutes and health services, and peer-reviewed reviews and trials. A figure, date or name goes into a page only if we have opened the source and found it there. When we cannot confirm a claim, we leave it out or describe the idea without the number. Where a technique's own supporters describe it, we say so and attribute the description to them.

We try not to lean on one country. Regulation, training and health systems differ around the world, and we say so where it matters.

How we state evidence

We report what a study or review found and what its authors said about the limits. We use cautious words where the sources do, and we say plainly when the research is small, short or mixed. We do not write that any technique treats, cures, heals or prevents a condition. Where the evidence for something is thin, the page says so near the top, not buried at the end. Our approach to reading research is set out on the page about how to read health claims.

How we handle health topics

These pages are educational. We do not diagnose, do not suggest what you should start or stop, and do not interpret symptoms. On every topic where safety is involved, we point to a doctor or qualified health professional, and the red-flag page sets out symptoms that need medical attention first.

How we write

We use plain words and short paragraphs, define a technical term when it first appears, and state exceptions instead of hiding them. We avoid testimonials, scare tactics and promotional language. The guide carries no advertising and makes no product or provider recommendations. Naming a type of therapy or a public body describes it and is not an endorsement.

Updates and corrections

Each page shows when it was last updated. We revisit a page when a major source changes its advice or when a reader points out an error. If you find a mistake, an out-of-date statement or a broken link, tell us through the contact form. We correct factual errors on the page itself and change the date, and we do not leave a known mistake in place.

Independence

This guide is independent of any practice, training organisation, manufacturer or business, and it sells and arranges nothing. See the about page for who runs it.

Frequently asked questions

Is a clinician reviewing these pages?

We do not claim clinical review. Pages are written from named public sources and checked against them. The sources are listed so that you or your own doctor can verify any statement.

Can you recommend a practitioner?

No. We name no practitioners, firms or directories and arrange no sessions. The page on choosing a practitioner explains what to ask of whoever you consider.

Do you think the Bowen Technique works?

We take no side. Our job is to report what the technique is, how its supporters describe it and what published studies have and have not shown. The first pillar page does that in detail.

The short version

Sources are named and opened, evidence is stated with its limits, and the guide stays out of medical advice. When something is wrong, it is corrected where you will see it.