You may be interested in http://examine.com/ which is a project similar to yours but focused mostly on fitness supplements specifically (although it has articles on major other supplements like fish oil). Their editors have actually provided a lot of write-ups even though they are just volunteers originally from reddit's Fitness subreddit.
Yeah, I've been following them for a while. Aside from the obvious difference in focus, my biggest gripe with that site is that the basic taxonomy is per supplement. The typical use case is the user hears about supplement A, hears it's good for purpose X, then searches for "A" or "A fox X", finds the examine.com page, and sees if A is really good for X.
With my project, the basic taxonomy was always per-complaint (or per-illness if you prefer). It doesn't presuppose the user has ever heard of any particular supplement. The idea is the user can browse to the page that documents their condition and quickly see a summary of all the evidence for all the different tested herbal treatments.
Now, I'm not at all sure that this difference in structure justifies starting all the research etc. from scratch. It may be the case that examine.com could trivially switch over to the structure I used. But I do think that my structure is superior.
