Editorial and source policy

The content in the SteloSupps guide is intended for general information and orientation. It does not replace individual medical, nutritional or pharmaceutical advice and does not constitute any claims of healing.

Who writes the guide content?

The guide articles are written by the SteloSupps editorial team. Our aim is a factual, easy-to-follow overview of topics related to food supplements – without exaggerated advertising promises and without disease or healing claims. Editorial responsibility for every published article lies with the SteloSupps editorial team.

How do we use AI support?

Our content may be prepared with AI support. Selection, source checking, editing and approval are carried out by the SteloSupps editorial team.

In practice, this means: AI tools can help with research, structure and wording. No text goes online without human review. Factual statements are checked against the sources listed below, product-related information against the current product declarations.

How do we select our sources?

For factual statements, we prefer official, scientific and legally binding sources. The order of priority is:

legally binding requirements – in particular Regulation (EU) No 432/2012 and the EU Register of authorised health claims;
assessments and opinions of the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA);
risk assessments and proposed maximum levels of the German Federal Institute for Risk Assessment (BfR) as well as information from the German Federal Office of Consumer Protection and Food Safety (BVL);
recommendations of the German Nutrition Society (DGE);
systematic reviews and meta-analyses, followed by individual peer-reviewed studies (e.g. via PubMed);
product declarations, labels and approved technical documentation for product-related information.

Every key factual statement is accompanied by a visible source reference in the respective article.

How do we handle manufacturer studies?

We give lower priority to studies funded or conducted by manufacturers or raw material suppliers. We do not use them as the sole evidence for an effect claim, and we label them for what they are. A manufacturer study does not replace an authorised health claim: if a claim is not authorised in the EU, we do not use it, even if individual studies report positive results.

We use certificates of analysis (CoA) for individual batches as a cross-check, but not as the sole basis for permanent product information – the label and approved product documentation apply for that.

How we handle health claims

We only use health claims about vitamins, minerals or other substances if they are authorised in the EU and the respective conditions of use are met. We deliberately use cautious wording and avoid statements that go beyond the authorised wording.

Timeliness and review

Every article states an editorial date. Content is reviewed when the legal situation, the body of evidence or product information changes. Product-related information (e.g. amounts, ingredients, mandatory notices) is checked against the current packaging information and the approved product documentation before publication.

A note on "medically reviewed"

We only label content as medically reviewed if a named medical professional has actually carried out the review. As long as this is not the case, we deliberately do not use this label.

Food supplements are not medicines

Legally, food supplements are foods. They are intended to supplement the normal diet, not to treat, alleviate or prevent diseases.

No substitute for individual advice

Our articles do not replace individual advice. During pregnancy or breastfeeding, if you have a medical condition, take medication regularly or experience symptoms, we recommend seeking advice from a doctor or pharmacist before use.