Who writes QiLife, and what we will not claim

QiLife makes claims about your health, so here is exactly what stands behind them — and, more importantly, what does not. This page is the answer to “should I trust this site”, written to be checked rather than believed.

Who writes this site

All content on QiLife is written and edited by QiLife Editorial. Every article, pattern page, assessment page and library entry carries this byline in both the visible page and its structured data — you can check it in any page source, and the method page documents how the assessments score.

QiLife Editorial is an editorial function, not a named individual, and we say so rather than inventing a person. We do not claim medical review by a licensed practitioner, because there is no licensed clinician reviewing this material.

How a page gets written

• Sources are named. Reference entries can be drafted from open sources such as Wikipedia, DBpedia and open-access literature. Anything still carrying an outside licence is credited on the about page with its licence.
• Every draft is rewritten, not pasted. Drafted content is rewritten and checked by hand before it goes live.
• Claims are scoped. Traditional use is stated as traditional use. Where an effect has been studied, the page says so; where it has not, the page does not imply it has.
• Cautions travel with the recommendation. Acupoints carry their contraindications, teas carry theirs, and food entries carry an avoid note. These are not optional extras on a separate page — they sit on the entry itself.

What we refuse to claim

This is the part most wellness sites leave out, so it is the part worth reading.

• No diagnosis. The assessments cannot diagnose, detect, rule out or stage any condition. Pattern differentiation is a traditional framework, not a biomedical diagnostic category.
• No treatment claims. We do not use “cures”, “treats” or “fixes”. Where a page describes a practice, it describes the practice and its traditional use.
• No borrowed authority. We do not claim conformance to a national standard we have not been assessed against, and we do not display a professional body’s logo without a relationship that actually exists.
• No invented precision. Scores are weighted questionnaire outputs. We publish the weights and the thresholds rather than presenting a number as a measurement.
• No herb or formula dosing as prescription. Tea formulas show traditional reference amounts. They are not prescriptions, and they are not safe to self-start in every situation.

Who this site is for

Adults using these assessments as general orientation within a traditional framework. The assessments are not calibrated for children, and they are not a substitute for assessment when something is wrong. If you are pregnant, taking medication, or managing a diagnosed condition, speak to a qualified clinician before changing anything.

Corrections

Mistakes here are real and some are inherited from the source material we migrated from. When a page is factually wrong, overclaims, or carries a caution that should be stronger, that is a defect and we would rather fix it than defend it. Corrections are made on the page itself with an updated modification date, so the change is visible rather than silent.

How this page is kept honest

The commitments above are not promises — they are assertions in the build. A test suite fails if an article loses its author, its review status or its modification date; if a structured-data block stops parsing; or if a pattern page references an acupoint that does not exist in the library. Those checks run before anything is deployed.