Thank you OP <| sep |> This is not exactly right . Most IRBs and those I have worked with would argue that shit science on humans is not ethical , and not allow the study to pass until it has been adequately redesigned . IRB approval for clinical trials is a prerequisite for good science so it does mean something and it is important but not sufficient . Unfortunately , there is no simple test to determine what is good science . Even prestigious journals publish papers that have been vetted by peers but still turn out to be flawed . If you are interested in this product you will have to critically examine the full paper including study methodology , the measured outcomes , the biological plausibility and how it links with previous research . Ultimately you will have to use your own judgement and it is always good to ask your colleagues for their thoughts as well .