Sources

How the figures are produced

Your calorie and protein targets are not written by the model that talks to you. They are calculated in code, from fixed rules, using your own measurements. The same inputs always give the same numbers, and those numbers are the same whoever is asking.

That matters more than it sounds. It means a target cannot drift because of how a conversation went, and it means the rules can be pointed at sources, which is what the rest of this page does.

Calories, protein and body measurements

What the daily targets are built from.

• Wang Z, Ying Z, Bosy-Westphal A, et al. Specific metabolic rates of major organs and tissues across adulthood: evaluation by mechanistic model of resting energy expenditure. Am J Clin Nutr. 2010;92(6):1369-1377. doi:10.3945/ajcn.2010.29885
  Why the daily energy figure is recalculated as muscle mass changes, rather than worked out once from height, weight and age and treated as fixed.
• Jäger R, Kerksick CM, Campbell BI, et al. International Society of Sports Nutrition Position Stand: protein and exercise. J Int Soc Sports Nutr. 2017;14:20. doi:10.1186/s12970-017-0177-8
  The protein target, which is calculated from body weight and given as a range rather than a single number.
• Helms ER, Zinn C, Rowlands DS, Brown SR. A Systematic Review of Dietary Protein During Caloric Restriction in Resistance Trained Lean Athletes: A Case for Higher Intakes. Int J Sport Nutr Exerc Metab. 2014;24(2):127-138. doi:10.1123/ijsnem.2013-0054
  Why the protein range goes up, not down, when someone is eating at a deficit.
• Achamrah N, Colange G, Delay J, et al. Comparison of body composition assessment by DXA and BIA according to the body mass index: A retrospective study on 3655 measures. PLoS One. 2018;13(7):e0200465. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0200465
  How much weight to put on a home body composition reading, and why those readings are treated as a trend rather than a measurement.
• Karastergiou K, Smith SR, Greenberg AS, Fried SK. Sex differences in human adipose tissues: the biology of pear shape. Biol Sex Differ. 2012;3(1):13. doi:10.1186/2042-6410-3-13
  Why fat distribution is described differently for women, and why it changes through midlife.
• White CP, Hitchcock CL, Vigna YM, Prior JC. Fluid Retention over the Menstrual Cycle: 1-Year Data from the Prospective Ovulation Cohort. Obstet Gynecol Int. 2011;2011:138451. doi:10.1155/2011/138451
  Why a weight reading is read against where someone is in their cycle before anything is made of it.
• Cheung K, Hume PA, Maxwell L. Delayed Onset Muscle Soreness: Treatment Strategies and Performance Factors. Sports Med. 2003;33(2):145-164. doi:10.2165/00007256-200333020-00005
  How soreness after unfamiliar exercise is explained, and when it is treated as ordinary.

Movement

What the movement guidance draws on. One of these is a negative finding, and it is here on purpose.

• WHO Guidelines on Physical Activity and Sedentary Behaviour. World Health Organization; 2020. isbn:978-92-4-001512-8
  The baseline for how much movement a week is enough, and what counts.
• Dam TV, Dalgaard LB, Ringgaard S, et al. Transdermal Estrogen Therapy Improves Gains in Skeletal Muscle Mass After 12 Weeks of Resistance Training in Early Postmenopausal Women. Front Physiol. 2021;11:596130. doi:10.3389/fphys.2020.596130
  Why resistance training is treated as the centre of the movement guidance after menopause, not an optional extra.
• Ng CA, et al. Effects of Moderate- to High-Impact Exercise Training on Bone Structure Across the Lifespan: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials. J Bone Miner Res. 2023;38(11):1612-1634. doi:10.1002/jbmr.4899
  Which kinds of movement are described as doing something for bone, and which are not.
• Abrahin O, et al. Swimming and cycling do not cause positive effects on bone mineral density: a systematic review. Rev Bras Reumatol. 2016;56(4):345-351. doi:10.1016/j.rbre.2016.02.013
  A negative finding, and it is here deliberately: swimming and cycling are good for plenty and not for bone density, and the app does not claim otherwise.
• Marques ACF, Rossi FE, Neves LM, et al. Combined Aerobic and Strength Training Improves Dynamic Stability and can Prevent against Static Stability Decline in Postmenopausal Women: A Randomized Clinical Trial. Rev Bras Ginecol Obstet. 2023;45(8):e465-e473. doi:10.1055/s-0043-1772178
  Why the guidance pairs strength work with something aerobic rather than treating them as alternatives.
• Wei F, Hu Z, He R, Wang Y. Effects of balance training on balance and fall efficacy in patients with osteoporosis: A systematic review and meta-analysis with trial sequential analysis. J Rehabil Med. 2023;55:jrm00390. doi:10.2340/jrm.v55.4529
  Why balance is treated as its own thing to train rather than something that comes along with everything else.
• Letton ME, et al. Classical Ballet for Women Aged Over 50 Years: Investigating Balance, Strength, and Range of Motion. Res Q Exerc Sport. 2024;95(1):171-182. doi:10.1080/02701367.2023.2169236
  How dance is counted, for women who do it and would rather not be told to go to a gym.
• Csala B, Szemerszky R, Kormendi J, Koteles F, Boros S. Is Weekly Frequency of Yoga Practice Sufficient? Physiological Effects of Hatha Yoga Among Healthy Novice Women. Front Public Health. 2021;9:702793. doi:10.3389/fpubh.2021.702793
  How yoga is counted, and at what frequency it is described as doing something.

How it talks about changing a habit

Selodía asks rather than advises, and it does not argue anybody into anything. That is a method with a literature behind it rather than a tone of voice.

• Rubak S, Sandbæk A, Lauritzen T, Christensen B. Motivational interviewing: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Br J Gen Pract. 2005;55(513):305-312. pmid:15826439
  A meta-analysis of 72 randomised controlled trials, and what grounds the approach behind how Selodía talks about changing a habit: asking rather than advising, and never arguing somebody into something.
• Miller WR, Rollnick S. Motivational Interviewing: Helping People Change. 3rd ed. New York: Guilford Press; 2013. book:Guilford Press, 3rd edition, 2013
  The text that defines that approach. The 3rd edition specifically, which is the one the rules were written against.
• Posner K, Brown GK, Stanley B, et al. The Columbia-Suicide Severity Rating Scale: Initial Validity and Internal Consistency Findings From Three Multisite Studies With Adolescents and Adults. Am J Psychiatry. 2011;168(12):1266-1277. doi:10.1176/appi.ajp.2011.10111704
  The validated wording used, verbatim, in the one place Selodía asks directly about self-harm. Changing the words would lose the property that was validated, so they are not changed.

Published figures quoted directly

These are the only numbers Selodía quotes from an outside body by name. They are fixed text in the code, so they are reproduced here exactly as you would see them.

• No more than 20g of saturated fat a day for women, and 30g for men. (NHS)
• 30g of fibre a day for adults, which most people fall short of. (NHS)
• No more than 6g of salt a day for adults, which is about 2,400mg of sodium. (NHS)
• 70g of total fat a day for an average adult. (UK reference intake)

Published guidance changes. If one of these is out of date, write to hello@selodia.app and it will be corrected.

How these are kept honest

The references above are kept in the repository alongside the code they support, not in a document that can drift away from it.

A scheduled scan re-checks the primary sources behind the calorie and protein rules and proposes changes without applying them, so nothing is altered by an automated process on its own. It runs on the first Monday of each month. It has not run yet: the first one is due in November 2026, and saying so is more use to you than a claim of a routine that has not started.

What is not sourced, and this is the half that matters

A page like this that lists only strengths is not worth reading. Here is the rest of it.

The urgent-symptom prompts are approved by the founder and not clinically reviewed. Selodía recognises a small number of things it will not suggest waiting on, such as bleeding after the menopause, a new lump, or blood where there should not be any. There are eleven of these. They were approved by the founder, in writing, and no clinician has reviewed them. That is recorded in the code and it is recorded here.

The patterns it shows you never draw a conclusion. It will tell you a thing has happened five times and on which days, and it will say plainly when there are too few days to mean anything. It will not tell you that one thing caused another, because it does not know that and neither does anybody else from a handful of entries.

What it says about your own data is description, not a finding. Nothing in Selodía has been validated as a predictor of anything.

Not a medical device

Selodía does not diagnose, and it is not a medical device or a regulated clinical tool. It does not replace a GP, a nurse, a pharmacist or any other clinician, and it is not an emergency service.

If something is worrying you, speak to a GP or call NHS 111. If it is an emergency, call 999.

Something wrong on this page?

A citation that does not support what it is said to support is a real problem and worth hearing about. Write to hello@selodia.app.