What this is
A record of what people actually tried.
If you live with a long-term condition, you have run experiments on yourself. You cut something out for six weeks. You took something for three months to see. You worked out what helped, slowly, and mostly on your own.
Hardly any of that gets written down. It surfaces once in a forum thread, or in a conversation with a friend, and then it is gone. The next person starts over.
This site asks three questions and puts the answers in a table anyone can read. That is all it is.
Why it is all public
Every answer goes into a table you can read, and the whole thing downloads as a spreadsheet. No account, no form to fill in, no waiting. We publish what people typed alongside the category we filed it under, so you can check our work instead of taking it on faith.
A dataset about what helps people is not worth much if those people can’t see it.
What the numbers can’t tell you
These aren’t small print. They are what the numbers mean.
Nobody checks any of it
Every entry is someone describing what happened to them. No doctor reviews it and no diagnosis is confirmed. It records what people say, which is not the same as what is true.
The people who write in aren’t typical
Someone who found something that worked has a reason to tell you. Someone who tried the same thing and felt nothing usually moves on. That makes everything here look better than it is, and we do not correct for it.
Nothing is being compared
Long-term conditions come and go by themselves. If someone starts a supplement during a bad spell and feels better a month later, this site records that the supplement helped. It cannot know whether the bad spell was simply ending.
We count entries, not people
One row is one thing someone tried. Nobody signs in, so a person who tried three things appears three times. When a page says entries, that is precisely what it means.
Small numbers stay small
Three out of four is four people. We show counts instead of percentages for that reason. A percentage drawn from four people looks like a finding, and it isn’t one.
False entries
An open form feeding an open table is easy to pollute. Someone could fill it with nonsense, or add the same remedy a hundred times to make it look effective. This is the likeliest way the project fails, so it is worth being straight about where we stand.
What helps
Every submission passes a bot check that we verify on our own server, so a script can’t simply post to the form. Text has a length limit. And because the table is public, anyone can look at the raw entries and see for themselves whether fifty identical ones turned up in an afternoon.
What doesn’t
A bot check stops scripts, not a determined person with a free afternoon. There is no account to ban and nothing waits in a queue for approval. We don’t detect coordinated entries today, and we would rather say so than claim a defence we haven’t built.
Why being open still helps
A closed dataset would have the same problem and hide it. Publishing every entry with its timestamp means interference leaves marks that anyone can find and anyone using the data can filter out. That is not a fix. It is the difference between a flaw you can see and one you can’t.
This is not medical advice
Nothing here is a recommendation, and none of it replaces someone who knows your history. Something that helped a stranger can interact badly with what you already take. Use it to find questions worth asking, not answers to act on alone.