Editorial policy

What this policy covers

Every page on this site: the calculator explanations, the methodology page, the glossary definitions, and any guide published later.

Who writes them

A software developer with no clinical qualifications. That fact is stated plainly on the about page rather than being papered over with a borrowed credential, and it shapes what follows.

How formulas get chosen

A calculator is only built from an equation that has a citable source. The reference goes into the methodology with a link to the original paper or an authoritative body, and the constants live in the calculation module rather than being typed into a page.

Where a site could have chosen between two reasonable equations, the more recent one is used — this is why the BMR estimate uses Mifflin-St Jeor (1990) rather than the older Harris-Benedict, which is still listed in the sources only because it is what most people mean when they say "the BMR formula".

How numbers get checked

• Inputs are validated against published adult ranges before any maths runs, so a 3-year-old's height never produces a result.
• Unit systems are normalised to metric internally, so a result is identical whether you typed kilograms or pounds.
• Safety limits are applied in the calculation module, not in the interface. A 900 kcal target cannot be returned by the deficit calculator however the page is driven.
• The test suite covers the arithmetic, including the edge cases at every limit. Constants and the page copy that describes them are checked against each other, so a changed multiplier fails a test rather than quietly making the text wrong.

How uncertainty is communicated

Wherever a result is an estimate, the page says which equation produced it and roughly how far it can be off. Where a figure is a convention rather than a finding — the 7,700 kcal per kilogram of fat rule of thumb, the activity multipliers, the 25% fat share in the macro calculator — that is labelled as a convention. Approximations are not presented as findings.

Safety limits such as the 1,200 kcal floor are described as guardrails built into the calculator. They are not presented as medically safe intakes for any individual.

What is deliberately absent

No claim of medical review, because there is none. No user testimonials or star ratings, because inventing them would be false. No before-and-after imagery. No affiliate links inside calculator results, since a supplement recommendation that pays the site is not advice.

Corrections

Contact us with the page, the figure you believe is wrong, and where you believe it came from. If a correction is warranted the number changes and the review date on the affected page moves. If it is not, the reply says so and explains why.

Corrections to a live formula are treated as a priority, and breaking a calculator is treated as an incident rather than a backlog item.