Methodology • Independent, science-driven framework
Methodology
Simple for consumers. Rigorous behind the scenes.
HGS translates complex ingredient and exposure information into a simple A–F grade designed to be understood instantly. The front label stays simple; the methodology stays rigorous and transparent.
- Define category and real-world use context
- Interpret ingredient function and relevance
- Assess evidence-based risk signals
- Apply exposure-aware weighting
Design principles
Clarity over complexity
Comparable within categories
Exposure matters
Evidence evolves
Human governance
Transparent updates
Methodology in one view
The methodology is built around a simple goal: communicate health risk clearly. HGS evaluates ingredient signals and real-world exposure, then maps the result to an A–F grade. Updates are versioned so the system can evolve with science.
Category context
Exposure-aware weighting
Transparent + auditable
Version-controlled updates
Principles that guide scoring
HGS is designed to remain usable, fair, and credible. The framework focuses on factors that materially affect risk, while keeping the consumer-facing result easy to understand.
Simple output
The front label must be understandable in seconds. Complexity stays behind the grade.
Category comparability
Grades should be comparable within a category so consumers can make meaningful comparisons.
Exposure matters
How a product is used—frequency, contact pathways, and intended use—changes real-world impact.
Evidence-driven updates
The methodology should evolve as scientific evidence evolves, with transparent versioning.
Auditability
Criteria should be reviewable and challengeable. Trust comes from transparency, not secrecy.
Human governance
Automation can assist with monitoring research, but governance must remain human-led and accountable.
Scoring workflow
This workflow shows how HGS moves from product inputs to a single grade. Exact implementation details may vary by category, but the structure remains consistent.
1
Define category + use context
Establish category and expected use so the evaluation reflects how the product is actually used.
2
Collect ingredient inputs
Use disclosed ingredient lists and known product characteristics as the starting point for evaluation.
3
Interpret ingredient functions
Interpret ingredients by role (e.g., preservatives, fragrances, sweeteners, surfactants) to apply category-relevant risk logic.
4
Assess hazard signals
Evaluate hazard signals where applicable (e.g., toxicity flags, irritation potential, endocrine disruption signals), using evidence-informed references.
5
Apply exposure weighting
Weight risk based on frequency and contact pathway to better reflect real-world impact.
6
Map to A–F grade
Translate the resulting score into a single grade intended to be understood instantly at point of decision.
What inputs inform scoring
HGS is designed to prioritize practicality: use information that can be consistently obtained and evaluated across products, while keeping the front label simple.
Ingredient intelligence
- Declared ingredients and known synonyms
- Functional roles (preservative, fragrance, etc.)
- Category-relevant hazard signals
- Documented evidence updates (versioned)
Exposure context
- How the product is used (intended use)
- Frequency of use (daily vs occasional)
- Contact pathways (ingestion, skin contact, etc.)
- Category-specific weighting rules
Product characteristics
- Processing intensity (where applicable)
- Packaging/contact considerations (where relevant)
- Category constraints for fair comparison
- Documentation for auditability
HGS focuses on producing a stable, understandable standard. The goal is not to overwhelm consumers with data, but to translate risk into a clear and consistent signal.
What the methodology outputs
The methodology is designed to serve multiple audiences: consumers, researchers, and partners. The public-facing output is simple; the supporting material enables transparency.
Front-of-package grade
A single A–F grade intended to be seen and understood instantly.
Supporting breakdown (optional)
A more detailed explanation of major contributing factors for transparency.
Ingredient-level notes (where applicable)
Plain-language notes to help interpret key drivers of the grade.
Versioning history
Documented updates so the framework can evolve with evidence.
Audit trail goals
A pathway toward reviewable, challengeable scoring—built on transparency.
Cross-category compatibility
A consistent structure that can support multiple consumer product categories.
Important limitations
HGS is a transparency framework, not medical advice. The methodology is designed to be honest about what it can and cannot claim, and to evolve with evidence.
Not medical advice
HGS grades are informational signals and should not replace professional medical guidance.
Evidence evolves
Scientific understanding changes over time. Methodology updates are expected and documented through versioning.
Category context matters
Grades are designed for comparison within categories; cross-category comparisons may not always be meaningful.
Methodology FAQ
How is the HGS grade calculated?
HGS evaluates ingredient risk signals and exposure context, then maps the resulting score into a single A–F grade. The consumer-facing output is simple; the methodology is designed to be rigorous and transparent.
Review or contribute
We welcome scientific review, category pilots, and constructive feedback. If you’d like to review a summary or contribute expertise, please reach out.