Editorial Policy · Cal Count io

This page sets out how content is made on calcount.io — who writes it, what sources we rely on, how we handle corrections, and where our boundaries are. We publish in a Your-Money-or-Your-Life (YMYL) topic area, and we think readers should be able to see exactly how we work before trusting what we publish.

Who writes for Cal Count io#

Cal Count io’s articles are produced by an in-house editorial team. Each post lists a named author byline; clicking the byline takes you to the author’s profile, which includes a short bio and the kinds of topics they cover.

We are nutrition writers and educators, not licensed physicians, registered dietitians, or pharmacists. Where the topic of an article touches a clinical decision — for example diagnosing a deficiency, choosing a medication, or treating an eating disorder — we explicitly say so and direct readers to a qualified professional. We do not give individualized medical advice and we never publish content that pretends to.

If we publish a guest article from a credentialed contributor (RD, MD, exercise physiologist), we identify that author and their credentials clearly at the top and bottom of the piece.

How we choose topics#

We pick topics from three streams:

Reader questions. Messages sent through the contact page, app feedback, and recurring confusion we see in user behavior in the Cal Count io app.
Common nutrition misconceptions. When a piece of folk wisdom contradicts the underlying evidence — “eating after 8 PM makes you gain weight,” “you need eight glasses of water a day,” “fat-free is healthier” — we write a clear, sourced explainer.
Real changes in evidence or guidance. When the FDA, the U.S. Dietary Guidelines, the WHO, or a major systematic review changes its position, we write about it. Smaller single studies don’t trigger an article on their own.

We do not write articles purely to chase search-volume keywords or because a topic is trending on social media.

Source hierarchy#

For any factual claim about nutrition, calorie targets, hormones, exercise physiology, or food safety, we reach for sources in this order:

Peer-reviewed research indexed on PubMed. We cite the abstract page so a reader can verify the claim and read the full text via their library or institutional access.
Government and intergovernmental health bodies — the U.S. Dietary Guidelines for Americans, USDA FoodData Central, FDA labeling rules, NIH Office of Dietary Supplements, the World Health Organization, the EFSA in Europe.
Position statements from major medical organizations — American Heart Association, American Diabetes Association, Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics, American College of Sports Medicine.
Reputable secondary sources — Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Mayo Clinic, Cleveland Clinic, NHS — used when the primary evidence agrees and we want a more readable summary to link to.

We do not cite blog posts, social-media content, marketing pages, or unattributed claims as evidence. If a claim only appears in those places, it doesn’t make our articles.

How a typical article is produced#

The standard process for a new article:

Outline. A single editor outlines the article: what question it answers, what audience it serves, what specific claims need source backing.
Source pull. Primary sources are gathered before drafting begins. If the underlying evidence doesn’t support the article’s premise, the premise gets revised or the article gets dropped.
Draft. A first draft is written in our own words from the source materials. We do not re-paraphrase other publishers’ articles.
Internal review. A second editor reads the draft for factual accuracy, clarity, and tone. They flag any claim that isn’t tied to a primary source.
Compliance pass. Every article is reviewed against our editorial principles below: no miracle claims, no supplement pushing, no fad-diet hype, appropriate caveats for clinical topics.
Publication. The article goes live with a publish date, named author, sources list, and the standing medical disclaimer.
Refresh cycle. Articles are reviewed at least annually and updated when guidance changes. Each update bumps the visible “last updated” date.

Editorial principles#

These are the lines we hold across every piece of content:

No miracle claims. “X reverses Y,” “Z prevents disease,” “loses N pounds in M days” — we don’t write this, even when a study sounds tempting. We report findings with their actual effect sizes and limitations.
No supplement pushing. Cal Count io covers whole foods, eating patterns, calorie tracking, and habits. We do not recommend supplements, doses, or brands.
No fad-diet hype. We cover popular diets — Mediterranean, DASH, intermittent fasting, low-carb, anti-inflammatory eating — based on the actual evidence and with the limits of that evidence stated honestly. We don’t sell any of them as a panacea.
Honest uncertainty. When the evidence is mixed, we say so. When something has been studied mostly in mice or short-term human trials, we say so. We don’t paper over uncertainty for the sake of a cleaner article.
YMYL caution. For anything that touches medication interactions, eating disorders, pregnancy, pediatric nutrition, or chronic disease, we name the boundary and direct readers to clinicians.
Plain language. We use clinical terminology where it’s accurate but explain it on first use. We don’t hide behind jargon to sound authoritative.

Conflicts of interest and disclosures#

Cal Count io is a free calorie-tracking app. Articles routinely link to the app where it’s a natural fit. That’s our main business model.
We do not accept payment for editorial coverage. We do not run sponsored articles disguised as editorial. If a piece is sponsored, it is clearly labeled “sponsored” or “paid partnership” at the top.
We may include affiliate links in some articles — for example, links to a book on a retailer’s site. Where present, that fact is disclosed in or near the article. Affiliate relationships do not influence our editorial judgment. Products are recommended on their merits, not commission rates.
The editorial team has no undisclosed financial ties to food brands, supplement makers, weight-loss programs, or pharmaceutical companies.

Use of AI tools#

We use AI-assisted tools (large language models) as part of the writing process — primarily for drafting outlines, suggesting structure, and copy-editing. Every article is written, reviewed, and edited by a human editor before publication. We do not publish raw model output. We do not auto-generate articles from a prompt and post them. The named author byline reflects the human responsible for the piece.

When research summarization is AI-assisted, a human still verifies every cited source against the actual primary literature.

Corrections policy#

If you spot a factual error in one of our articles, please email contact@calcount.io with:

The article URL
The specific claim that’s wrong
A link to the source you’d like us to consider

We read every message. When we make a substantive correction:

The correction is applied promptly.
The article’s “last updated” date is bumped.
For meaningful factual corrections (not typos or wording tweaks), we add a brief “Correction” note at the bottom of the article describing what changed.

Topics we don’t cover#

There are deliberate boundaries around what Cal Count io publishes. We don’t cover:

Specific medical diagnostics or treatment. “How to interpret your bloodwork,” “what dose of vitamin D you should take” — these are clinical questions for a doctor.
Eating disorder treatment. Anorexia, bulimia, binge eating disorder, ARFID, OSFED. These need specialist clinical care, and content addressed to people with these conditions can do real harm if it’s not delivered by qualified clinicians. We will write about general healthy-eating patterns and refer readers to appropriate resources.
Prescription nutrition or weight-loss medication. GLP-1 drugs, appetite suppressants, prescription supplements. We may explain the relevant physiology, but we don’t give advice on prescription decisions.
Supplements and dosing. We don’t recommend brands or doses.
Pediatric or pregnancy-specific nutrition decisions. We may touch on general principles, but specific guidance belongs with a pediatrician, OB/GYN, or RD.

Updates to this policy#

This policy is reviewed at least annually and updated when our practices change. The “last reviewed” date below reflects the most recent editorial-process review.

If you have a question about how we work that this page doesn’t answer, contact us and we’ll either clarify it directly or update the policy.

Last reviewed: 2026-05-08.