All Nutrition & Santé content is signed « The Nutrition & Santé editorial team ». This page explains who is behind that signature, how we write, which sources we rely on and what we rule out.
Who we are
The editorial team is a small team. It writes the guides, the comparisons and product reviews, the career and training pages, the glossary, the food pages and the recipes, and it builds the site’s calculators.
We chose a collective signature. A piece of content is never the work of one person alone: it is written, then its figures and sources are double-checked before publication. Above all, we refuse to inflate our credibility with names, photos or qualifications for show. The team does not yet include a health professional; a reviewer will join to validate the health content, and their name will then appear, with their qualification, at the top of every page they have reviewed. Until then, no page on the site claims to have been reviewed by a doctor or dietitian.
What we write
- The guides answer one precise question: a food during pregnancy, a supplement and its interactions, a food and diabetes. They start from official recommendations and studies, and say when the evidence is lacking.
- The comparisons and reviews analyse products on sale based on their composition, their price per gram of active ingredient and what studies say about the ingredients. The score is calculated using a public grid, before any commercial link is added.
- The career and training pages describe careers in nutrition and wellbeing: what the law allows, recognised qualifications, career prospects. We always distinguish a regulated health profession from a wellbeing activity.
- The glossary defines nutrition terms simply, with reference figures where they exist.
- The food pages and recipes show nutritional values taken from public tables, never estimated by guesswork.
How we write a piece of content
1. Start from a real question
We write about the questions readers really ask, as they are typed into search engines. A page answers that question first, in the opening lines, then develops it.
2. Go to the primary source
We read the original document: the Anses opinion rather than an article summarising it, the European Medicines Agency monograph rather than a blog, the study abstract on PubMed rather than a press release. When several studies contradict each other, we favour systematic reviews and meta-analyses, and we say so.
3. Check every figure
A protein content, a maximum dose, a number of product recalls: every figure is taken from its source and dated. Nutritional values come from the Anses Ciqual table, or failing that from the USDA database. When we collect data ourselves, for example the labels of products sold in France or the recalls published on RappelConso, we give the date of collection and the number of products concerned.
4. Cite our sources
Each page ends with the list of its sources, with full references. That way you can check what we write for yourself.
5. Keep it up to date
Recommendations change, products are reformulated, prices move. We go back over our pages, and the date shown at the top of each piece of content is that of its last update.
Our reference sources
- Anses: the Ciqual composition table, opinions and nutritional references.
- Santé publique France and the French Ministry of Health: recommendations from the Programme national nutrition santé (the French national nutrition and health programme), advice for pregnant women.
- EFSA, the European Food Safety Authority: reference intakes, safety limits, authorised health claims.
- HAS, ANSM and the European Medicines Agency: practice guidelines, drug interactions, herbal monographs.
- Scientific literature: Cochrane reviews, meta-analyses and published trials, consulted on PubMed and Europe PMC.
- USDA FoodData Central for foods that Ciqual does not measure, Open Food Facts for label data and RappelConso for product recalls.
The details of our databases, calculation formulas and scoring grid are published on our methodology page.
What we rule out
- Making up data. A figure we cannot find in a source is not published. A missing value stays blank rather than being replaced by an estimate.
- Promising a health effect. No food or supplement cures a disease. We report what studies show, with their limits.
- Repeating a marketing claim without checking it. When a supposed benefit circulates everywhere without proof, we say so.
- Letting affiliation influence a ranking. A product with no partnership is never left out of a comparison.
- Replacing a health professional. Our content informs; it does not diagnose and does not replace the advice of your doctor, midwife, pharmacist or a dietitian.
Why we write the way we do
We write as we would speak to a friend asking us the question, addressing you directly: simply, without needless jargon, but without losing any precision. A friendly tone takes nothing away from the rigour of the sources.
Write to us
An error, a missing source, a product whose composition has changed: report it. We check and we correct. To find out more about the site, its funding and how it works, read our About us page.