Editorial policy
How we choose evidence
Health is a field where it's easy to overstate. These are the rules we write by, so you know how far to trust each sentence.
Sources we use
- Systematic reviews and meta-analyses.
- Randomised controlled trials in humans.
- Large observational studies, with a clear note that they show association, not cause.
- Positions of expert bodies (e.g. EFSA) for recommended intakes.
Animal and cell studies appear only to explain a mechanism, and we say so. We check every source on PubMed or by DOI before citing it. Retracted papers are never used as evidence.
What the labels mean
Evidence: Strong evidence
Several good human studies with consistent results.Evidence: Moderate evidence
At least one good controlled human trial or consistent observational studies; the conclusion may change.Evidence: Early evidence
Small or short studies, surrogate markers, or mechanism without confirmed outcomes.Evidence: Not proven
A popular claim without research support, or with contrary findings.
How we write
- Every piece opens with an "In short" box, with the author and last-checked date at the top.
- No diagnoses, no medication doses, no promises of cures.
- Where a doctor matters (diabetes, pregnancy, eating disorders, medication), we say so clearly.
- We draft with the help of AI tools, and check every claim and every source by hand, in the original.
Who stands behind the content
The author is the BioRitam editorial team. We have no expert reviewer yet; when we do, their name, credentials and review date will appear on the piece. The legal operator is listed in the imprint.
Corrections
If you spot an error or outdated information, write to us. We check every report and mark corrected pieces with a new review date.
Money and independence
We earn from our own digital products. We publish no paid content and recommend no products for commission.