To be included in the NutriSearch database, the vast majority of the information published on a given site must be consistency based on quality scientific evidence. No one can be 100% accurate 100% of the time, but a site must be producing evidence-based content at least ~90% of the time to remain in the database.
Included sites are those that meet the following criteria:
Cherry-picking sources that agree with their beliefs while ignoring those that don't (i.e., not interpreting data within the full context of what is known about a given topic).
Unevenly evaluating evidence (i.e., praising low-quality studies that support their position while discrediting higher-quality studies that refute it).
Over-extrapolating study results (i.e., stating that findings from an animal trial apply directly to humans).
Citing invalid or uncredible sources.
This database is fluid and will be edited as new reliable sources emerge (or as once reliable sources become unreliable). If you have a source you think should be included in our database or see one you think doesn't belong, shoot me and email and let me know!