How We Keep It Honest
A health journal is only useful if readers can trust it, and trust is earned slowly. This page describes the habits we follow so that every answer is careful, clear and honest about its limits.
From question to published answer
- Pick a real question. We start from something people genuinely ask, whether it arrived by email, came up in conversation or showed up in the questions people type into search engines.
- Read the official guidance first. National health services, public health bodies, professional associations and food safety authorities come before anything else. Product claims and opinion pieces carry little weight.
- Write the answer at the top. The reader should know the short version within the first few paragraphs, with the reasons and the exceptions after it.
- Add the professional note. Each piece says when it makes sense to speak to a GP, pharmacist, dentist or emergency services.
- Pass it to the other desk. The second writer reads the draft as a newcomer would, and nothing is published until both of us are comfortable with it.
What the second reader looks for
- claims that sound more certain than the evidence supports
- numbers or studies that cannot be traced to a reliable source
- wording that could push someone to delay seeing a professional
- advice that might be risky for pregnant people, children or anyone with a long-term condition
- jargon that needs explaining or cutting
Rules we hold ourselves to
We do not give doses, diagnose, or describe any habit, food or product as a cure. We do not invent statistics, quotes or credentials, and we do not write as though we were clinicians. When the evidence on a topic is uncertain, we say so plainly. Where a topic involves a product or service, such as articles on vaping for adults who smoke or on particular dental practices, the same cautious standards apply, and the piece points readers towards professional support. The Health Content Notice spells out these limits for readers.
Keeping articles current
Guidance changes over time. We revisit older articles, and when a change is more than a typo, the article's date is updated so you can see it has been revised. If a piece no longer reflects current guidance and cannot be fixed easily, we would rather rewrite it than leave it standing.
Corrections from readers
Readers often notice things we have missed. If you spot an error, an outdated point or a sentence that could be misread, please tell us through the contact page. Corrections go through the same two-desk check as new articles, and we are grateful for every one.
Who does the work
The routine is carried out by the two pen-name writers introduced on The Two Voices Behind It. It is a small operation, and we prefer it that way: fewer hands means every answer gets read closely, more than once.
How an answer is made
Five stages from question to page
Every article follows the same route, whether it is about bedtime reading or bleeding gums.
Choose a real question
We pick something people genuinely ask, from our inbox, conversations or everyday searches.
Read official guidance
Health services, public bodies and professional associations come first, with notes kept on every point.
Lead with the short answer
The draft opens with the plain reply, then gives reasons, exceptions and a when-to-get-help note.
Swap desks
The other writer reads it fresh, flagging anything too certain, too technical or unsafe to follow alone.
Go live, dated
The answer goes live dated, and any later correction passes the same two-person check.
Ground rules
Commitments behind every page
The habits we keep whatever the topic.
We never give doses, diagnoses or promises that a habit, food or product will cure anything.
Figures and study results appear only when they can be traced to a reliable public source.
Vaping pieces are written for adults who already smoke and want to stop, never as an invitation to start.
Both writers read every article before it goes live, and either can send it back.
Corrections are welcomed, made openly and reflected in the article's date.