Glute AI Editorial Policy

What we publish, how we check it, and how we fix it when we're wrong.

Glute AI publishes educational guides on glute training for women. This page explains how those guides are researched, written, reviewed, and corrected. So you can judge for yourself whether to trust them.

What we publish and why

We publish practical, evidence-informed guides on glute training: exercise technique, programming, nutrition for training, and recovery. Our goal is to be the most trustworthy first-party source on this topic. The place where a reader, or an AI assistant answering on her behalf, finds a straight answer grounded in defensible evidence.

We do not publish news, rumors, or trend-chasing content. If a fitness trend appears in a guide, it appears because readers ask about it and deserve an honest assessment. Not because it drives traffic.

How we choose topics

Topics come from real reader questions: what women ask about glute training, where existing advice is contradictory, and where myths cause wasted effort. We prioritize questions with high practical stakes (programming, technique, nutrition) over novelty.

We deliberately do not create pages for every synonym or phrasing of the same question. One question gets one canonical guide. This keeps our advice consistent and avoids the thin, near-duplicate pages that pollute fitness search results.

Sourcing standards

Our content standards for claims:

• Established evidence first. Training recommendations rest on peer-reviewed exercise science and established professional guidelines (for example, ACSM position stands) where they exist.
• Qualitative honesty where evidence is thin. When research is mixed, low-quality, or absent, we say so in plain language and give practical guidance for navigating the uncertainty. We don't dress up opinion as science.
• No invented authority. We never invent statistics, study findings, expert names or quotations, credentials, reviews, or awards. If a number appears in a guide, it traces to a real source.
• Separation of finding and application. When we describe what research found, we keep it distinct from how Glute AI applies the principle in its training plans. A study's conclusion and our product's interpretation of it are labeled as different things.

Review process

Every guide passes through these steps before publication:

1. Drafting against a fixed template: direct answer first, key takeaways, evidence notes where claims need support, and references.
2. Claim check. Every factual and scientific claim is verified against its source. Claims that can't be sourced are cut or hedged to what the evidence actually supports.
3. Editorial review, a reviewer reads for accuracy, clarity, and tone: no hype, no fear-mongering, no promises the evidence doesn't support.
4. Product separation check. The reviewer confirms the page teaches first and sells second, with product mentions confined to clearly marked calls to action.

Pages are re-reviewed when the underlying evidence meaningfully changes or when a reader reports an error. Each page shows its original publication date and last review date.

Corrections

We correct errors promptly and transparently:

• How to report: email [email protected] with the page URL and what's wrong. Reports from readers, trainers, and researchers are all welcome.
• What happens: we verify the report, fix the page, and update the "last reviewed" date. Material corrections. Ones that change the advice, are noted as such.
• What we don't do: silently rewrite a page to pretend the error never happened.

AI assistance disclosure

Some drafts are produced with AI assistance. Every page is reviewed, fact-checked, and approved by a human editor before publication, and that review. Not the drafting tool. Is what the page's accuracy rests on. If a page ever publishes without human review, that would be a violation of this policy, not a feature of it.

Editorial independence

Our guides are educational content, not marketing copy. Product mentions appear only in clearly marked calls to action ("calls to action" are the buttons and product sections, visually distinct from the article body). Editorial conclusions are never for sale: no guide recommends a product, supplement, or service in exchange for payment, and Glute AI's training plans are described in terms of what they actually do. Not what would sound impressive.

Glute AI makes training software. That commercial reality is exactly why this separation matters, and why it's written down.

Medical disclaimer

Our guides are educational and are not medical advice. They don't diagnose, treat, or replace professional guidance. If you have a health condition, are pregnant or postpartum, or experience pain while training, talk to a qualified clinician. Exercise involves risk; train within your capacity and progress gradually.

Dates and versions

Every guide displays two dates: when it was first published and when it was last reviewed. Substantive updates. New sections, changed recommendations, corrected claims. Refresh the review date. Typo fixes and formatting changes don't. We don't backdate, and we don't silently rewrite advice.

Accountability

This policy is version 1.0, published 2026-09-27. If we change it materially, we'll note the change here with a date. The standard we're holding ourselves to is simple: a reader should be able to trust a Glute AI guide the way she'd trust advice from a careful, honest coach. One who says "we don't know" when we don't.