Fact-Checking Process

· Maintained by Blue Power Research Team

This page complements our Editorial Policy and describes the practical fact-checking process we run on every article before it goes live, and on a rolling basis afterwards.

What we fact-check

For every article, we fact-check these five things explicitly:

  • Study citations — the study is real, the citation resolves to a live source (PubMed, PMC, or a journal DOI), and the study title and authors match.
  • Numeric claims — every percentage, dosage, trial duration, and sample size is traced back to the primary source. We do not repeat numbers from second-hand summaries.
  • Regulatory statements — any claim about EFSA, MHRA, ASA, NHS, or similar bodies is verified against the body's own published guidance.
  • Mechanism claims — when we state how an ingredient works in the body, we link the mechanism to a peer-reviewed source that describes it.
  • Safety statements — contraindications, interactions, and side-effect profiles are cross-checked against at least one systematic review or regulatory safety assessment.

How we handle conflicting evidence

Nutrition science is rarely unanimous. When sources disagree, we follow a simple order:

  1. We weight systematic reviews and meta-analyses above individual trials.
  2. We weight independently funded trials above industry-funded trials, and we disclose funding source when it's relevant to interpretation.
  3. We weight larger, longer, double-blind placebo-controlled trials above smaller or open-label ones.
  4. If the evidence is genuinely mixed, we say so in the article rather than picking a side. Readers deserve to know when science is uncertain.
  5. If a claim rests on a single small trial with known methodological limitations, we flag those limitations alongside the headline number.

Our review cycle

Articles are not "published and forgotten":

  • Every article is scheduled for re-review at least once every 12 months.
  • When a major new systematic review is published in a topic we've covered, we update the relevant articles immediately, regardless of the normal schedule.
  • The "Updated" date shown on each article reflects the most recent substantive fact-check. Typo fixes and minor formatting changes do not bump the Updated date.
  • If a cited source goes offline (link rot), we replace it with an equivalent primary source or remove the claim if no equivalent exists.

Corrections and retractions

We correct mistakes openly. If we find — or a reader reports — a factual error, we:

  • Update the article to remove or correct the error.
  • Update the "Updated" date on the article.
  • Respond to the reader who reported it (when contact details were provided).
  • For significant corrections (changes that materially affect a health recommendation), we add a brief editor's note at the top of the article explaining what changed and when.

To report an error, email hello@trybluepower.co.uk with the article URL and a description of the issue. We read and respond to every correction request.

What we cannot do

This page should also be honest about our limits:

  • We are not a clinical organisation and our content is not medical advice. Readers with specific health conditions should consult their GP.
  • We do not run our own clinical trials. All evidence we cite comes from third-party published research.
  • We do not have an in-house Registered Nutritionist at this time. When we engage one, their credentials and AfN registration will appear on articles they review. Until then, our Research Team works from peer-reviewed primary sources and follows the process above.

Related pages