[seasonalgrit]

Both of those sites appear to be money-making ventures that sell vitamins; I wouldn't consider them reliable sources.

Here is a university page with information:

http://www.umm.edu/health/medical/altmed/supplement/vitamin-...

[ConfucianNardin]

Examine.com does NOT sell vitamins/supplements.

They collect and analyze available research, and the result of that process is their product (in the form of guides etc).

[seasonalgrit]

Thanks for noting this. Their web site design (as well as the use of a dotcom domain) gives a misleading impression

[Matrixik]

And Chris Masterjohn, PhD is also working with them, example http://v6.examinecdn.com/erd/chrismasterjohn2.pdf

Personally I don't know better source with information about different supplements than examine.com, more how they are working here: https://examine.com/about/ If you know better source point it to me, please. This university page you provided is short and old.

Just one question: what's wrong with using dotcom domain?

[seasonalgrit]

If examine.com's metaanalsyses are based on legitimate research papers -- and you've read some of the papers yourself and find that they indeed provide support for the article citing them -- then i'd say yeah, use the site.

i guess to respond to your question: most biomedical research today is eminating from universities and university-affiliated entites. page for page, i generally wouldn't expect a .com web site -- the majority of which are probably just attempting to generate advertising revenue -- to be on par in terms of accuracy etc with a .edu site. generally, I've found one of the best ways to improve the signal-to-noise ratio is to filter to a specific set of domains (e.g., ,edu, .gov) when searching online.