Our Policy on Human Authorship and the Responsible Use of AI

This document outlines TransSculpt’s commitment to human authorship, intellectual integrity, and reader trust in the age of Artificial Intelligence (AI). Our content is built on a foundation of authentic experience, meticulous research, and human judgment. Therefore, we maintain a strict Human-First policy regarding the use of generative AI in all published materials.

I. The Human-First Philosophy: Why Authenticity is Non-Negotiable

At TransSculpt, my mission is to deliver deeply considered, trustworthy, and original written work. We believe that true insight, editorial judgment, and ethical decision-making are uniquely human capabilities that cannot be outsourced to, or replaced by, algorithmic models.

The rapid development of generative AI tools presents both opportunities for efficiency and significant risks to journalistic integrity, including:

  1. Hallucination and Fabrication: AI models are known to generate confident-sounding but entirely false information, or "hallucinate" facts and sources.

  2. Ethical and Algorithmic Bias: AI systems are trained on historical data sets that often reflect systemic biases, which can be unintentionally amplified in generated content.

  3. Loss of Voice and Experience: Content direction and analysis rooted in personal experience, empathy, and wisdom cannot be replicated by technology, leading to a loss of the very authenticity our readers seek.

  4. Accountability Deficit: When AI generates content, the question of who is responsible for errors, misrepresentations, or ethical breaches becomes blurred. We maintain that the human author and editor are solely accountable for every published word.

To mitigate these risks and uphold the trust our readers place in us, this policy establishes clear, definitive boundaries for how AI tools may be used.

II. The TransSculpt Generative AI Use Policy (The Red Line)

The following list summarizes the scope of permissible and prohibited AI use on all content produced for TransSculpt:

🚫 Prohibited Uses

  • Content Generation: AI may never be used to write original sentences, paragraphs, summaries, analysis, or conclusions intended for publication.

  • Editorial Direction: AI may never be used to determine the final structure, narrative flow, thesis, or primary arguments of an article. This requires human judgment and intent.

  • Fact-Checking/Vetting: AI tools must not be used to verify sources, check factual accuracy, or confirm data. All verification must be conducted by human researchers using primary and vetted secondary sources.

✅ Permitted Uses

  • Ideation & Brainstorming: AI may be used strictly for initial concept generation, suggesting alternative headlines, or creating basic, internal-use-only outlines.

  • Grammar & Correction: AI may be used for standard proofreading, spelling, and basic grammatical assistance, such as identifying typos or suggesting rephrasing for clarity.

III. Detailed Guidelines for Permissible and Prohibited Use

A. Permitted Uses (Enhancing the Human Workflow)

When used responsibly, AI tools can act as an administrative assistant, helping our human authors be more efficient.

  1. 1. Ideation and Concept Generation

    1. Our authors are permitted to use generative AI tools as a sparring partner to overcome writer's block or explore a topic’s breadth.

      1. Example: Prompting an AI tool with: "What are five common misconceptions about topic X?" or "Suggest twenty creative headlines for an article on Y."

      2. Requirement: The output of this stage is considered raw, unvetted information. No text generated here may be copied directly into a draft. The human author must apply their expertise and judgment to select and refine the ideas.

  2. 2. Grammar, Spelling, and Style Correction

    1. Tools like Grammarly or the grammar-checking functions of a large language model (LLM) may be used to polish a complete, human-written draft.

      1. Focus: This use is limited to correcting syntax, punctuation, minor structural errors, and clarity checks.

Warning: Authors must be aware that even grammar correctors can introduce subtle changes that shift the meaning or tone of a sentence. The final review is always the responsibility of the human author to ensure the correction maintains the original intent.

  1. 3. Data Processing and Transcription

    1. AI tools are allowed for efficiency in handling large, non-editorial datasets:

    2. Transcription: Using AI to transcribe interviews or video footage, which a human will then verify and edit against the original audio.

    3. Data Organization: Using AI to categorize or cluster large amounts of internal research notes (but not to perform the final analysis).

B. Prohibited Uses (Replacing the Human Core)

To safeguard the integrity of TransSculpt content, any use of AI that displaces or diminishes the human role in the creation, direction, or verification of content is strictly forbidden.

  1. 1. Content Generation (The "No Copying" Rule)

    1. Why it's Banned: Generative AI is a prediction engine, not a truth engine. It synthesizes patterns from its training data, making it incapable of producing original thought, reporting, or authentic experiential accounts. Directly using AI-generated text is a form of plagiarism of the public commons and introduces unverifiable inaccuracies.

      1. Scope: This prohibition applies to all forms of generative AI, including text, synthetic images, video, and audio intended to represent reality or news coverage.

  2. 2. Editorial Direction and Structure

    1. Why it's Banned: The direction of an article—the choice of which sources to prioritize, which ethical angle to pursue, and what overall narrative serves the reader's best interest—is an act of editorial judgment. This requires human values, understanding of context, and journalistic intent, all of which are absent in AI. AI cannot ethically weigh conflicting information or prioritize the public good.

  3. 3. Substantive Editing

    1. Why it's Banned: Substantive editing involves fact-checking, verifying source attribution, correcting misrepresentations, and ensuring the final piece aligns with the publication’s ethical standards. Entrusting an AI model with these tasks would mean relinquishing the accountability that underpins reader trust. All fact-checking, editing, and final approval must be executed by human editors.

  4. 4. Confidentiality and Source Protection

    1. Why it's Banned: We are required to protect our confidential sources and any proprietary, non-public data. When proprietary or sensitive information is entered into a public-facing AI tool (like ChatGPT or Gemini), it may be captured by the platform and used to train its underlying model, potentially compromising our intellectual property and sources. The input of any private or proprietary information into a generative AI model is strictly prohibited.

IV. Alignment with Global Journalistic Standards

Our Human-First policy is not merely an internal preference; it reflects the stringent ethical standards adopted by the world's most trusted news organizations.

  • The Associated Press (AP) and the "Unvetted Source" Rule

    • The Associated Press, a global leader in news standards, has provided clear guidance that underpins our position. The AP states that generative AI output should not be used to create publishable content and must be treated as unvetted source material.

    • This means the content is treated with the same skepticism a journalist would apply to an anonymous, unconfirmed tip.

The AP also explicitly bans the use of generative AI to alter any elements of photos, video, or audio that represent reality, reinforcing our ban on using AI for visual or multimedia fabrication.

(Source: AP Standards around Generative AI)

  • Reuters and the Mandate for Transparency

    • Reuters, guided by its foundational Trust Principles, mandates that its reporters and editors are fully responsible for any content produced using AI technology. They emphasize the need for robust transparency and disclosure when AI tools are used.

This confirms our policy that accountability remains exclusively human. The technology is merely an instrument, and the human journalist is the ethical and legal entity responsible for the results.

(Source: Reuters AI and the Future of News)

The Industry Consensus

Across the industry, the general consensus is: AI Augments, It Does Not Author. Reputable news organizations are establishing policies that treat AI output not as finished copy but as a tool for efficiency, idea generation, or basic automation, always requiring a human editor to serve as the final authority for fact-checking, analysis, and ethical review.

While TransSculpt is primarily a personal blog, seeking to provide personal accounts and an interpretation of the latest science-backed fitness trends applied to transgender femmes, valid personal accounts free from AI-generated generalities are key to maintaining reader-author trust.

  1. 1. The Human Vetting Process

    1. Every piece of content published on TransSculpt undergoes a rigorous, human-led vetting process:

      1. Authorial Certification: The human author certifies upon submission that the article’s content, research, analysis, and primary conclusions were generated solely through their own intellectual labor and conform to the Prohibited Uses section of this policy.

      2. Editorial Review: A human editor is responsible for reviewing the content for accuracy, tone, compliance with our ethical standards, and consistency of voice.

      3. Fact-Check Audit: All sourced claims are cross-referenced with primary or high-quality secondary sources, entirely without the aid of generative AI.

  2. 2. Mandatory Disclosure

    1. To maintain absolute transparency with our readers, we have established the following disclosure standards:

      1. Substantive AI Use: If an article used AI for extensive ideation or complex transcription that materially contributed to the process of writing (but not the content itself), a clear, editor-approved note will be included at the end of the article, stating: "This article was created with human authorship. AI tools were utilized in the ideation phase only, and all final content, editing, and fact-checking were conducted by a human editor."

      2. Minor AI Use: Standard, ubiquitous tools (like a web browser’s spell check or basic Grammarly integration) do not require disclosure, as they are part of the standard, universal editing toolkit.

  3. 3. Policy Evolution

  4. We recognize that the field of Artificial Intelligence is evolving daily. This policy is a living document that will be reviewed by the TransSculpt editorial board every six months, or whenever a significant technological development warrants a re-evaluation of our ethical boundaries. We commit to always prioritizing human integrity and reader trust above technological convenience. Any updates to this policy will be communicated clearly on this page.

For questions regarding this policy, please get in touch with our editorial team.

V. Accountability, Review, and Transparency