About the project
Soul of Herbs is a herb catalogue that puts two things side by side that usually get blended together: what tradition says about a plant, and what research shows. We do not want them speaking with one voice. This page describes how the content is made and who is responsible for it.
What this site is not
It is not medical advice and not a substitute for professional care. You will not find dosages 'for an illness' here, nor suggestions for replacing prescribed medication. If you are dealing with a specific health problem, are pregnant or breastfeeding, or take prescription drugs, that belongs with a doctor or pharmacist - not in a catalogue.
Tradition and science are kept apart
Every claim on a herb card has a type, and the interface does not hide it. A scientific claim, a traditional use, a spiritual use, a historical mention and a folk superstition are separate categories carrying different weight.
The spiritual and traditional part may contain rituals, symbolism, old herbals and folk advice - but it is never presented as verified medical information. When a herb is described as having been used to 'calm the mind', that is a record of tradition, not a study result.
How we mark the strength of evidence
In the scientific part, each claim is accompanied by the study type, the strength of the evidence, the source and its limitations. We distinguish between a laboratory experiment, an animal study, an observational study, a clinical trial, a randomised controlled trial, a systematic review and an institutional monograph - because 'a study has shown' means something different in each case.
When documented evidence is missing, that is a state of its own, not a gap to be filled with a general phrase. An empty field is more honest than padding.
Rules for safety notes
Notes on drug interactions and phototoxicity are filled in only where a specific, documented risk for that particular herb exists, with a citation. We never fill them with generic padding such as 'consult your doctor if you take medication' - a sentence like that says nothing and dilutes the warnings that do.
Confusion risk gets particular attention: where a herb can be mistaken for a poisonous plant, the warning is part of the card and is checked word by word during translation.
Sources
Scientific claims carry their source and, where available, a DOI or link and the year of publication. We rely on specialist monographs and review articles; for safety claims, institutional monographs (the EMA HMPC, for example) take precedence over individual studies.
Translations and their status
The catalogue is written in Czech and translated from there. English has been reviewed; for the other languages the status varies, and we do not pretend everything has been checked by a native reader. Parts of the content are awaiting native review, and until then Czech and English are the most reliable versions.
Safety texts are exempt from that rule: each language is checked separately for them, because an error in such a field can cause harm.
Editorial responsibility
Content is not generated straight into publication. Every content batch is checked before it goes live: automated audits watch for source-language leakage, missing translations and typography, but the safety claims themselves are checked by a person against the cited source.
Found an error?
A factual error in a safety note, a misidentified plant or a confused species is a priority fix for us. Corrections are made at the source of the content and released as a new version, so the change stays traceable.