Editorial standards

How our content is made

What the content is for

The articles in the knowledge base, the explanations on the calculator pages and the entries in the glossary serve general education. They are meant to make relationships comprehensible — not to give individual recommendations.

That is not a legal caveat but an editorial decision: what makes sense for an individual depends on history, health, everyday life and goals. We do not have that information, and a website cannot collect it.

What we do not write

Four things do not appear in our texts, regardless of how well they would sell:

• No disease-related claims. Nothing phrased as “helps with”, “relieves”, “prevents” or “treats”. This applies to training as much as to food.
• No efficacy claims about foods. We describe what a nutrient is and where it occurs — not what it supposedly does.
• No supplement dosages and no intake recommendations.
• No promises of results or timeframes. No kilograms, no weeks, no before-and-after logic.

These rules are checked automatically before every publication. The check searches every article in both languages for such phrasing and blocks publication while a match remains open.

Handling inconclusive research

In exercise and nutrition science, much is less clear-cut than popular accounts suggest. Where that is the case, we say so — even though a firm statement would read more comfortably.

In practice: studies are not presented as proof when they run for a few weeks, examine small groups or match conditions artificially. Observational data is named as such and not portrayed as cause and effect. And where rules of thumb come from practice rather than measurement, we say so.

Figures and sources

Figures appear only where they are put in context. Reference values are named for what they are — recommendations by professional bodies for population groups, not individual prescriptions. Ranges from review papers are reproduced as ranges and not reduced to a point value.

We deliberately do not maintain footnotes with study citations. The reason is honesty: a bibliography creates the impression of systematic review. Our texts are summaries of generally accepted knowledge, not review papers. If you want to know the basis for a statement, ask us — we will answer specifically.

Review and updating

Every article carries the date of its last editorial review at the end. That date means the text was read in full and checked for accuracy and rule compliance at that point — not merely touched in one place.

If the state of knowledge changes, the text is changed and the date reset. We do not quietly delete statements; where corrections affect substance, we say so.

No advertising, no paid content

There is no advertising on this website or in the app. There are no paid posts, no partnerships that influence content, and no affiliate links — no references we earn from.

Ryvion is financed solely through the Pro and Ultra subscriptions. An obvious question follows: does that influence what we write? Our answer is separation — the explanatory texts mention the app only where it factually belongs, and the calculators work fully without it.

Reporting errors

If you notice a factual inaccuracy, a phrasing that goes too far, or an outdated figure, write to support@ryvion.de. A note with the page reference is entirely sufficient.

We look into every report. If something turns out to be wrong, it is corrected and the review date reset.

Scope

Ryvion is a fitness and lifestyle product, not a medical device, and does not replace medical advice. The content of this website is not medical, nutritional or exercise-science advice. If you have health complaints or pre-existing conditions, are pregnant or breastfeeding, or take medication, please consult a doctor.

Last updated: 15.08.2026