Describe how you eat and upload your labs. Independent AI models debate your nutrition picture — eating pattern vs evidence, deficiencies your bloodwork hints at, what the literature says would change first — and the consensus AI Opinion & Discussion PDF lands in your inbox automatically. Literature discussion to bring to your physician or a registered dietitian, not a prescribed diet.
Ask the council — from $25 See a sample reportStripe checkout. Pick your council size — $25 to $249.
On the next page: your question, your situation, and any PDFs. Held only in memory — never stored.
On AWS Bedrock under a signed HIPAA BAA — no outside model is ever contacted. Independent AIs open, critique each other, a chair writes the consensus.
The AI Opinion lands in your inbox automatically — usually within the hour. Then every copy of your data is gone.
Your documents and details are handled only in memory while the council debates, then discarded the moment your PDF is sent. No database, no folder, nothing to leak. The only record kept is the delivery email itself — fingerprinted (SHA-256) so the report's authenticity can always be proven and forgeries disproven.
Every AI model runs on AWS Bedrock under a signed Business Associate Agreement (BAA). No outside model is ever contacted; your case is sent only to those in-BAA models and is never stored.
Your material produces your report and nothing else — it is never used to train models, ours or anyone's.
100% automated end to end — never reviewed by any human being.
Card data goes to Stripe's hosted checkout and never touches our servers.
Everything you send travels over TLS-encrypted connections.
The purpose of the AI Council is to throw complex topics and discussions into debate between independent, integrated AI models and LLMs — positions, critique, consensus — and hand you the result, while protecting your security, confidentiality, and anonymity: every AI model runs on AWS Bedrock under a signed HIPAA Business Associate Agreement (BAA), no outside model is ever contacted, and nothing you send is ever stored — it is held in memory only while the council debates, then discarded. Every AI Council product is 100% automated, never reviewed by any human being, and never used for training, ours or anyone's.
Nutrition discussion runs on models benchmarked against the US medical licensing exam (MedQA). Human pass ≈ 60%, expert physicians ≈ 87% — the lead models here score ~92%. These are AI opinions grounded in cited literature — fad claims get called out in the debate.
| Who | Medicine — MedQA (USMLE-style) |
|---|---|
| Expert physicians, same questionshuman reference | 87% Liévin et al. ↗ |
| Human passing threshold (USMLE-style)human reference | ≈60% PLOS Digit. Health ↗ |
| Claude Opus 4.1Anthropic · chairs the consensus | 92.5% vals.ai ↗ |
| Claude Sonnet 4.6Anthropic · senior seat | 92.1% vals.ai ↗ |
| Amazon Nova ProAmazon · document analysis | 81.1% Stanford HELM ↗ |
| Claude Haiku 4.5Anthropic · fast seat | 79.6% vals.ai ↗ |
| Llama 4 MaverickMeta · open-weight diversity | 43.3% vals.ai ↗anomalously low vs its own model family on this harness — its legal score is 77.8% |
| Amazon Nova LiteAmazon · fast cross-check seat — cross-checks, never chairs | —no published score for this exact model |
| Llama 3.3 70BMeta · independent reasoning seat | —closest published sibling (Llama 3.1 70B): 84.8% vals.ai ↗ |
| Mistral Pixtral LargeMistral (EU) · European lab · vision seat | —its text backbone (Mistral Large 24.11): 76.2% vals.ai ↗ |
2 models — $25 · 5 — $49 · 10 — $99 · 12 (full bench) — $249. Pick the council size below.
Independent published evals of the exact model versions where available — siblings labeled as such, no score invented, re-verified 2026-07-03. Official benchmarks: MedQA paper · MedQA data · LegalBench · LegalBench paper. Independent leaderboards: vals.ai MedQA · vals.ai LegalBench · Stanford HELM · NCBE MBE. Scores move as models ship.
| Human-led expert panel (MD + dietitian + endocrinologist) | $1,500 – $5,000 |
| Registered dietitian, per visit | $100 – $200 |
| Functional-nutrition package | $500 – $2,000 |
| Generic meal-plan apps (no labs read) | $10 – $50 / month |
| NutritionCheck AI Opinion & Discussion | $25 – $249 |
The council reads your actual bloodwork and your actual diet — then argues about it so you don’t have to guess between fads.
Our system doesn't replace any of them — but it sure helps to educate you before you pay them.
Pay first, then you'll describe your situation, tell the council your country and state/province, and upload documents on the next page — because we store nothing, your details are only ever handled in memory while the council debates, then discarded. The opinion is grounded in your jurisdiction's laws and guidelines, never a default. See a sample report first →
No. It is a 100% AI-generated educational discussion of the nutrition literature applied to your information. It is not medical advice, not a treatment diet, and does not replace a physician or registered dietitian — especially if you have a condition or take medication.
Nutrition is where single sources are most fad-prone. The council format forces models to challenge each other and cite evidence, and the report shows where they disagreed.