Protect yourself
from bad websites
Award winning security extension for your browser
(100% Free. No in-app payments or subscriptions)
7,000+ reviews  in Google Chrome
1,200,000+ users  have installed WOT and are browsing safely
Detect phishing scams and malware
Know which internet shops you can trust
Rate websites!
Help clean the internet

Is safe? Reviews & Ratings – Natural Health Resource – The world's most widely referenced, open access, natural medicine database, with 20,000+ study abstracts and growing daily

Do you own this site?Click here

Protect yourself from harmful sitesAdd WOT

Share your feedback about

greenmedinfo.comreviews 75
Steven HoldenSat Jan 17 1970

This is one of the worst "health sites" out there. The authors of this site start with a premise: anything Eastern/natural=good, anything Western/conventional medicine=bad. They then proceed to scour the internet for anything which supports their preconceived beliefs.

Perhaps most vile is their universal anti-vaccine stance. They have no concept of risk/benefit or medical statistics. They "cherry-pick" only those articles which support their beliefs and crudely dismiss or ignore those that don't. They employee authors (such as Gary Null and Suzanne Humphries) who are luminaries of the blog "encyclopedia of american loons." Yes, this is a real blog, look it up.

Their own medical director is a big corporate shill, though you have to dig a little to find it. Google "kelly brogan fisher wallace stimulator." Ewwww……

If you love pseudoscience and want to have your beliefs confirmed, go to this website. If you enjoy critical thinking and thoughtful, balanced writing, read this only if you have a bucket nearby to contain your vomit.


This website purports to be science- and evidence-based, but the articles I read on it are full of fear-mongering, half-truths and lies.

For example, the article on cupric sulfate in infant formula never mentions that copper is an essential nutrient but instead highlights how it is used as a pesticide.

It never mentions how much CuSO4 is in infant formula, nor what the reommended daily intake of copper is for a healthy diet. It never compares those two amounts to the amount you have to take to experience toxic effects (about 20 times higher than the recommened daily intake, BTW).

I can imagine a new mother who does not produce enough brest milk, or whose baby does not suckle well and thus she has supplement with formula, coming across this webpage on a site purporting to be an expert and an authority on health and then freaking out because she sees "cupric sulfate" in her formula's list of ingredients. She then goes and buys an "organic" formula with no copper fortification and ends up giving her child copper deficiency disease because of this website.

It is simply a horrible, fear-mongering website that is dangerous to your health!

littlepowderFri Jan 16 1970

The site claims that sunlight prevents cancer when it is the CAUSE of deadly cancers, such as MELANOMA, SQUAMOUS CELL CARCINOMA & BASAL CELL CARCINOMA.

DragonCalfSat Jan 17 1970

Founded by Sayer Ji, an alt-med booster who has described vaccination as "cannibalism" and who holds no scientific credentials, this site is a cornucopia of rabid anti-vaccinationist propaganda, unproven cancer "cures," misrepresentation of published scientific papers and just plain bad advice.

For example, a paper which showed no increased risk of a certain type of brain damage after Hep B vaccination was described as showing a "74% increased risk" of the pathology. See the comment of "Physics Police" on this post.


This site provides vaccine misinformation that could result in children becoming ill from vaccine preventable disease. It also seems to have a conspiracy bent. e.g. Get you vaccine information from a reputable source, not this site.

kersplunkinFri Jan 16 1970

Promotes misinformation and questionable content. Would not recommend using as an information source, particularly on health issues.

Dark-MatterFri Jan 16 1970

This website is full of misinformation, incomplete information and pseudoscientific/unscientific thinking.

should be used if you insist on viewing this sight! "

Cowabunga123Fri Jan 16 1970

Pseudo science and gibberish

This site is not a reliable source of information

stephencookFri Jan 16 1970

I use this website regularly. It is evidence-based and has excellent research materials with links to highly regarded journals.

Dr.BelvinsFri Jan 16 1970

This site should be regarded lightly by those who value science, and used only by those who have disregarded it in favor of embracing the cult-religion of alternative medicine. The forms of "evidence" and "research articles" presented within makes this man of science cringe, cry, and despair. It's criminal what these perpetrators are doing to the throngs of "true believers" out there….the throngs of folks who were never taught how to think scientifically or objectively.


Safety Rating Breakdown


Misleading or unethicalAlternative medicine


54 / 100

Child Safety

52 / 100