Editorial Policy

This page explains how Froqel articles are created, who is responsible for them, how artificial intelligence may assist the editorial process, and where the limits of this site sit.

If anything described here does not match what you find on a page, that is a mistake worth reporting. You can find our contact details at the bottom of the page.

How an article is made

Every guide on this site follows an editorial process from the initial idea to publication.

Topic

We start with a question dog owners genuinely ask, usually involving a symptom, food, behaviour, safety concern, or routine care task.

Topics may also come from situations Emily, Froqel’s owner and editor, has experienced while caring for her dog, Barnaby. These real-life experiences help us identify the practical questions, uncertainties, and details that may matter to other dog owners.

Research

We consult established veterinary references and identify what they say about the subject. We also note where sources disagree, where evidence is limited, and where recommendations depend on the circumstances of an individual animal.

AI tools may assist during this stage by helping us organise information, compare sources, interpret technical terminology, and identify figures, dates, or statements that require closer review.

Draft

Articles are prepared by people, sometimes with assistance from AI tools.

AI may help organise a section, suggest a clearer explanation, summarise research notes, compare information from different references, or produce a working version of a limited passage. It is not responsible for writing every part of every article.

No Froqel article is published as a completely AI-written text.

Emily also contributes her own observations, insights, and accounts of situations she has genuinely experienced with Barnaby. When these personal experiences are included, they are presented as real-life accounts rather than as universal veterinary evidence.

Edit and check

A person reviews the article, checks its claims against the consulted references, removes unsupported or unnecessary material, and rewrites anything that is unclear, inaccurate, overstated, or unsuitable for publication.

Sections produced with AI assistance are treated as working material, not as finished or verified content. They must go through the same editorial review as every other part of the article.

Personal accounts involving Emily and Barnaby are also reviewed to ensure that readers can clearly distinguish between an individual experience and a general health recommendation.

Sources

The main references consulted are listed at the end of the article whenever appropriate, allowing readers to review the original material themselves.

Personal experiences are not presented as scientific sources. They are included to provide practical context and an honest account of what happened in one particular situation.

Publication

Nothing publishes itself. A person makes the final decision about whether an article is sufficiently clear, accurate, useful, and responsibly presented to go live.

How we use AI

We use artificial intelligence as an editorial support tool. We believe it is better to explain how it may be involved than to leave readers guessing.

AI is mainly used to assist with research, interpretation, comparison, organisation, and the preparation of working material.

Veterinary literature can be technical, spread across several references, and not always consistent. AI tools may help us:

• organise research notes;
• compare what established references say;
• identify agreements and differences between sources;
• extract relevant figures, dates, definitions, and timelines;
• interpret technical or clinical terminology;
• create outlines or suggested article structures;
• improve the clarity of individual explanations;
• review wording for readability;
• prepare working drafts of selected passages.

This does not mean that every article, or every sentence within an article, is written by AI. The extent of AI assistance varies from one article to another. Some passages may receive AI-assisted drafting or editing, while others are written directly by Emily or the editorial team.

Nothing on Froqel is intended to be published as content written entirely and autonomously by AI.

AI-generated material is never treated as a source. Any factual statement must be supported by the references consulted during the editorial process.

The judgement stays with people. A person decides:

• which sources are appropriate;
• how much weight to give each source;
• what to do when references disagree;
• which claims are sufficiently supported;
• how strongly a warning should be worded;
• what information should be removed;
• when professional veterinary care should be recommended;
• whether a personal experience is relevant to the article;
• whether an article is ready to be published.

Before publication, the material is reviewed, corrected, shortened, expanded, or rewritten as necessary. Claims we cannot adequately support are removed.

AI tools do not decide what is true, choose what Froqel publishes, or replace editorial responsibility. They must not be used to invent studies, statistics, expert opinions, quotations, or personal experiences.

Any account involving Emily and Barnaby comes from Emily’s own experience. It is not generated or invented by AI.

AI tools also do not stand in for a veterinarian. When a question requires professional judgement about a specific animal, the responsible recommendation is to contact a veterinarian.

Who writes here

Froqel is published by RANQUEEI DIGITAL LTDA and is owned and edited by Emily.

Emily contributes to the site’s editorial direction, topic selection, research, writing, revisions, source selection, and final review before publication.

She also brings first-hand experience from caring for her dog, Barnaby. Some articles include genuine insights, observations, lessons, and accounts of situations they have experienced together.

These personal contributions are intended to make the information more practical, relatable, and transparent. They may explain what Emily noticed, what concerned her, what she tried, what she learned, or when she decided to seek professional help.

However, Barnaby’s experience is the experience of one dog. It cannot predict what will happen with another animal and is not used as proof that a particular approach will be suitable, safe, or effective for every dog.

Where an article combines Emily’s personal experience with veterinary information, we aim to make the distinction clear. Personal accounts provide context; veterinary references support general health claims.

Nobody on the Froqel team is a veterinarian. We do not hold veterinary qualifications, examine animals, diagnose conditions, prescribe treatments, or have access to your dog’s medical history.

What we can do is consult established veterinary information, organise and explain it in accessible language, share relevant first-hand experiences honestly, and clearly indicate when a question is beyond what a website should attempt to answer.

The use of AI tools does not change who is responsible for the content. Emily and the Froqel editorial team remain responsible for deciding what is researched, written, edited, and published.

The sources we rely on

We prefer references maintained by veterinary institutions, teaching hospitals, professional organisations, and other established sources.

References that may be consulted across the site include:

• VCA Animal Hospitals;
• the Merck Veterinary Manual;
• Cornell University College of Veterinary Medicine and the Riney Canine Health Center;
• the American Kennel Club;
• the ASPCA Animal Poison Control Center;
• the American Veterinary Medical Association;
• the American Animal Hospital Association;
• peer-reviewed veterinary research when a question depends on published evidence.

AI output is not included in this list because AI is not treated as an evidence source. When AI assists with research or interpretation, the underlying veterinary references must still be consulted and evaluated.

Emily’s experiences with Barnaby are also not presented as scientific evidence. They are clearly framed as individual observations or personal accounts.

We do not use forum discussions, social media posts, or comment sections as evidence for veterinary health claims. Where an article discusses experiences commonly reported by dog owners, those reports are presented as personal or anecdotal observations, not as scientific evidence.

What this site does not do

We do not diagnose

An article may help you understand or describe what you are observing. It cannot determine what condition your dog has.

Emily may describe what happened with Barnaby, but that does not mean another dog showing similar signs has the same condition.

We do not prescribe or provide dosages

We do not provide medication amounts, personalised treatment protocols, or substitutes for a veterinary prescription.

We do not promise outcomes

We do not guarantee cures or claim that a particular food, product, supplement, or action will resolve a medical condition.

Something that appeared to help Barnaby may not help another dog and should not be interpreted as a guaranteed result or veterinary recommendation.

We do not replace an examination

Online information cannot account for everything a veterinarian may observe during a physical examination or learn from an animal’s medical history and test results.

When a guide recommends contacting a veterinarian, that recommendation is an important part of the article, not a formality.

In an emergency, contact your veterinarian or nearest animal hospital immediately rather than continuing to read online.

For a suspected poisoning in the United States, the ASPCA Animal Poison Control Center can be contacted at 888-426-4435, and the Pet Poison Helpline can be contacted at 855-764-7661. Both services may charge a consultation fee.

Corrections and updates

We would rather correct a mistake than allow it to remain published.

If you find an error, an outdated recommendation, an unclear explanation, or a claim that does not appear to match the source cited, contact us and identify the page and passage concerned.

When a correction materially changes an article, we update the text and may also update the date displayed on the page.

Guides involving subjects that can change over time, including vaccination schedules, parasite prevention, treatments, products, and professional recommendations, may be reviewed periodically against newer guidance.

This review may also include checking sections that were prepared with AI assistance. If an AI-assisted passage is inaccurate, unsupported, misleading, or unclear, editorial responsibility for correcting it remains with us.

Where a personal account involving Barnaby is updated because Emily later learned more or the situation changed, we may also revise the article to provide the most accurate context available.

Advertising

Froqel intends to carry advertising to help fund its work.

Advertising will be kept visually separate from editorial content. Advertisers do not decide which subjects we cover, which sources we use, what conclusions an article reaches, which personal experiences Emily shares, or how we describe the role of AI in our editorial process.

If we publish sponsored, commercial, or affiliate content, it will be clearly labelled on the relevant page.

Contact

Corrections, questions, and editorial feedback: emily@froqel.com. See also our Disclaimer, Privacy Policy, and Terms of Use.