How we work
Editorial methodology
Most wellness sites won't tell you how their articles get made. Here's exactly how ours do.
1. Research standards
Every health claim in an article needs at least one of the following sources:
- Peer-reviewed studies indexed on PubMed (we cite by PMID)
- Systematic reviews or meta-analyses (preferred over single trials)
- Guidance from major health authorities — NIH, WHO, USDA, AND, AHA, ADA
- Position papers from credentialed professional bodies
We avoid: anecdotes presented as evidence, single small studies with cherry-picked results, supplement-industry press releases, and quotes from "experts" who are paid by the products they recommend (we'll note this when it's relevant context).
When studies conflict — which they often do in nutrition — we say so. When a claim is unproven or contested, we say that too. "More research is needed" appears in our articles only when it's the honest answer.
2. Author vetting
Articles are written by contributors who meet at least one of these criteria:
- Registered Dietitian (RD/RDN), Certified Nutrition Specialist (CNS), or equivalent licensure
- Master's-level or higher education in nutrition science, public health, or a related field
- Trained health journalist with at least 5 years' experience writing on wellness/medical topics for major outlets
Full bios, credentials, and (where applicable) outside affiliations are disclosed on each author page.
3. Medical review
Articles that make health claims or describe symptoms, mechanisms of action, or dietary interventions are reviewed by a licensed clinician (typically an MD, ND, or RD) before publication. The reviewer's name appears in the article byline.
4. Product reviews
Our review process for any supplement, program, or device:
- Ingredient evaluation. We map every active ingredient against the research literature. Does the dose match what's been studied? Is the form (e.g. magnesium glycinate vs. oxide) bioavailable?
- Manufacturing transparency. Third-party testing? GMP-certified facility? Country of origin? We note red flags.
- Customer evidence. Aggregated reviews from independent sources — Trustpilot, BBB, Reddit communities — not the brand's own testimonials.
- Price-per-effective-dose. Many products are priced for marketing, not for clinically meaningful doses. We surface the math.
- Refund policy & terms. Read the fine print so you don't have to.
We're transparent about the limits of this process. We don't run lab assays. We don't conduct double-blind trials. What we do is read every relevant study and present the evidence so you can decide.
5. Affiliate disclosure
Most product links on this site are affiliate links. If you buy through them, we earn a commission — at no extra cost to you. Commissions never determine what we recommend. We have killed reviews of high-commission products that didn't hold up. We have recommended products that pay us nothing. Read our full affiliate disclosure.
6. Corrections policy
We make mistakes. When we do, we fix them — visibly:
- Factual corrections are noted at the top of the article with a date and brief description.
- Significant rewrites trigger an "Updated" timestamp; we don't quietly republish under the original date.
- Email editorial@weghtloss.com if you spot something wrong. We respond to every credible flag.
7. AI use disclosure
Some of our articles are drafted with assistance from AI language models, then heavily edited, fact-checked, and reviewed by our human contributors before publication. AI does not make editorial judgments here — it accelerates drafting; humans verify, source, and approve every claim. Pure AI output is never published unedited.
8. What we don't do
- We do not run sponsored content disguised as editorial.
- We do not accept payment to write favorable reviews.
- We do not write "best of" lists ranked by commission rate.
- We do not collect or sell reader data beyond standard analytics.