Find the grain of truth without swallowing the whole claim.
Nutrition questions are rarely solved by collecting more confident opinions. They are solved by asking a narrower question, weighing the right evidence, and translating it without sanding off the uncertainty.
Every conclusion keeps its receipts.
We separate evidence quality from presentation quality. A polished chart does not upgrade weak data, and a complicated explanation does not automatically make an answer more honest.
Define the claim
Who is it about? What intervention, comparison, outcome, dose, and time period are actually being discussed?
Match the evidence
Study design, consistency, directness, bias, and effect size matter more than a dramatic headline.
Preserve uncertainty
We state what is known, what is estimated, and what could reasonably change the conclusion.
Make the next step proportionate
The recommendation should be no more certain—or burdensome—than the evidence warrants.
Not every number has the same source quality.
| Source class | What it means | How we use it |
|---|---|---|
| Reviewed exact source | A specific record or body of evidence has been matched and reviewed. | Supports the strongest, narrowest claim the source actually establishes. |
| Manufacturer label snapshot | A dated value from official packaging or a manufacturer product page. | Useful for that product and formulation—not proof of independent analysis. |
| Planning estimate | A transparent approximation used to support a practical decision. | Useful for planning when the uncertainty is visible and proportionate. |
| Unknown | The available source does not support a defensible value. | Shown as unknown. It is never quietly converted to zero. |
The shortest version: “We do not know” is a valid finding. Zero is a number, not a placeholder.
Evidence notes
Each note starts with one narrow claim, shows the source boundary, and ends with a practical way to think—not a dramatic verdict.
A weight calculator is not a weight plan.
Why a useful tool needs assumptions, meals, tracking, and feedback—not merely a calorie number.
What “evidence-based” should actually mean.
A decision process that integrates research, professional judgment, and the person’s context.
Unknown is not zero.
Why missing nutrition data must stay visibly missing until a source supports a value.
In RD review
These articles are written and waiting for a dated review by a registered dietitian. They publish one by one after review.
- Why the 3,500-calorie rule overpredicts weight lossFor RD review
- Why the scale jumps: water, glycogen, sodium, and the menstrual cycleFor RD review
- Plateaus: adaptation, logging drift, and what to checkFor RD review
- Safe rates of loss, maintenance, and gain: when to get personal helpFor RD review
- How to log food accurately enough to be usefulFor RD review
- Exercise and weight: what the calorie numbers really addFor RD review
See the standard in use
The weight planner shows how the model works, what has been checked, where food numbers come from, and what the tool does not do.