Typed is not yet published by a named company or a named person, and this page will not pretend otherwise. There is no editorial board, no registered entity behind it today, and no medical or nutrition professional on staff.
That matters more here than it would on most sites, because this one publishes doses and interactions. So the honest version is: judge the content by what each entry shows you — its sources, its grades, and whether it has been reviewed — and not by an institution, because there isn't one standing behind it yet. Where an entry cannot support a claim, it says so on the entry.
When an operating entity and a named editor exist, they belong here, with the entity's legal name, its jurisdiction, and how to reach it.
Most supplement information sits at one of two extremes. Tracking apps record what you took and explain nothing. Reference sites are thorough and rigorous, and read like a textbook — most people close the tab partway through the second paragraph.
Typed is the layer in between: mechanism-first explanations of what actually happens in your body, shown visually, sourced like a reference site but readable in a couple of minutes. Every entry follows the same shape — the journey through your body, when to take or do it, how long before anything changes, and what's a myth.
Typed covers supplements, food, and movement. They aren't three separate apps: they share one absorption-and-adaptation model and one tag-based interaction engine, which is what lets the site say something useful about caffeine and your evening training session, or vitamin D and the fat in your dinner.
Every entry carries its own review state, on the entry itself: a reviewed entry has been checked against the sources it cites and shows the date that happened, and a draft entry says that it hasn't been. Across the 250 supplement entries, 57 are marked reviewed and 193 are still drafts.
No named dietitian or pharmacist reviews the content at present. When that changes, this section will name them and their credentials — until it does, the per-entry state above is the only review claim Typed makes. The site makes no claim of professional review anywhere else, including on the homepage.
What a review consists of, so the word means something specific here:
each graded claim is checked against the source cited for it, each
medication interaction against a drug-interaction reference, and the
dose and upper limit against the reference intake for the region
shown. An entry that passes gets a lastReviewed date
and stops showing the draft notice. Reviews are done in traffic
order, most-read first — and that ordering is currently
guesswork, because no analytics run on this site.
A caveat worth stating plainly: most entries have no
lastReviewed date at all. A missing date means nothing
has been recorded, not that a review happened and went undated, so
the draft notice on the entry is the thing to read.
Every claim on an entry carries one of four grades. They describe how good the research is, not how much the effect is worth to you — a strong grade on a small effect is still a small effect, and the entry says which it is.
Two things the grades deliberately do not do. They do not average into a score for the supplement as a whole, because a compound with strong evidence for one claim and none for four others is not "well-evidenced" — the grade belongs to the claim, not the bottle. And a grade of Insufficient is not an accusation: on a benefit it means the trials did not find the effect, on a safety claim it means nobody has established long-term safety, and those are opposite kinds of news. The entry labels which.
When a grade moves, it is logged with the reason on the changelog. When we simply got something wrong, that is logged as a correction.
Typed doesn't sell supplements and doesn't take affiliate commission on them. That's deliberate: the moment a site earns money per bottle sold, its incentives stop pointing at accuracy. Building the education layer first keeps "this probably won't do much for you" a sentence we can afford to write.
Typed is educational content, not medical advice, diagnosis, or treatment. It can't account for your medical history, your medication, or your blood work, and it isn't a substitute for talking to a qualified healthcare provider. Full terms are on the terms & disclaimer page.
The index behind every entry — what exists, how it's classified, its tags and goals, and macros for foods — is published as a free JSON API with no key and no rate limit. If you're building something and want to link to a food or match against ours, start at the API.
If something here is wrong, we want to know — especially with a source attached. Every entry page has a correction link, or write to the contact address.
What happens then is public: a factual error that gets fixed is listed on the corrections log, with what the page said, what it says now, and why the first version was wrong. A site willing to publish doses should be willing to publish its own mistakes, and an empty log is only meaningful if the log exists.