Editorial policy
Palmus publishes careful, accessible explainers about advanced sports physiology and functional training for men aged 35 and above. We value clarity over spectacle and context over certainty. This policy describes how topics are chosen, how sources are used, how articles are reviewed and how errors are handled, and it applies to every article, glossary entry and reference page on the site. It is written so that readers can judge for themselves whether the standards described here are being followed.
1. Mission
Our purpose is to help readers ask better questions about endurance, strength, recovery and movement. We aim to explain how the body responds to training so that readers can follow a conversation with a coach or clinician more easily. Articles are written in plain language and define technical terms on first use. We do not set out to persuade readers toward a product, a programme or a particular lifestyle. Palmus is not a replacement for a clinician, and the mission is limited to explanation. Topics are selected because readers have asked about them or because published research on them has changed, and not because a topic is expected to attract advertising.
- (a) Explain physiological concepts in plain English.
- (b) Describe the limits of the evidence alongside the findings.
- (c) Point readers toward qualified professionals for personal decisions.
2. Sources
Writers consult primary research, professional guidance and credible institutional material where available. Preference is given to peer-reviewed studies, position statements from professional bodies and publications from public health institutions. When evidence is limited or mixed, the article says so, and we avoid presenting a single study as settled knowledge. Source lists are shown at the foot of longer articles so that readers can read the originals. Where a study involved a small group, a narrow age range or a single sex, the article notes that so that readers do not apply the finding more widely than it supports. Sources that cannot be located or checked are not used, and secondary summaries are traced back to the original wherever possible.
- (a) Primary research and systematic reviews are preferred to commentary.
- (b) Guidance from recognised professional organisations is cited by name and year.
- (c) Anecdotes are labelled as such and are not used as evidence.
- (d) Studies with limited samples are described as limited.
3. Attribution
Contributors and material influences are identified when their role affects interpretation. A short byline shows who wrote or reviewed each article and the date of the last review. If a contributor has a professional connection to something discussed, we disclose it near the relevant passage. Photographs are credited or described when they depict a specific situation. Where an article draws closely on the work of another author, that author is named and the source is linked. Contributors are asked to declare relevant interests to the editor before an article is commissioned and again before it is published.
- (a) Bylines name the author and any reviewer.
- (b) Relevant professional connections are disclosed beside the passage concerned.
- (c) Use of generative artificial intelligence is disclosed in the statement below.
Generative AI disclosure. Palmus does not use generative artificial intelligence tools to write, rewrite or summarise articles, glossary entries or policy pages. Text is written by named human authors and checked by a second editor, and every figure and citation is verified by a person against the original source. Spelling and grammar checkers may be used for proofreading, but they do not decide what an article says. Some illustrative photographs on the site may be created or edited with AI image tools; they are decorative, are not documentary pictures of real events or identifiable people, and carry descriptive alternative text. If this practice changes, this statement and its change log will be updated before the change takes effect.
4. Independence
Commercial relationships must not dictate conclusions, omissions or medical claims. Editors decide topics and wording, and any partner is informed of this before a relationship begins. A sponsor cannot review an article before publication in order to change its conclusions. If an article touches on a business that supports Palmus, we state the connection and the editor in charge reviews the text a second time. At the date of this edition, Palmus does not sell products, courses or memberships, and no advertising is presented as editorial content. The advertising and partnerships policy describes labelling and the separation between commercial and editorial staff.
- (a) Topic selection is made before any commercial discussion.
- (b) A supporter cannot approve, delay or alter an article.
5. Language
We avoid guaranteed outcomes, miracle language and pressure-based sales phrasing. Headlines describe the article and do not exaggerate it, and we do not use countdown wording or invented scarcity. Numbers, such as heart-rate ranges or training volumes, are given with their context and limits. Claims about health are phrased cautiously and linked to their source. Verbs such as may, is associated with and was observed in are used where the evidence describes a relationship and not a certainty. Terms that readers may meet in a gym or in marketing, such as detox or fat burning, are explained and treated cautiously where they have no agreed scientific meaning.
- (a) Headlines are descriptive and checked against the article text.
- (b) Comparisons avoid superlatives that cannot be verified.
- (c) Words that imply certainty are replaced with measured language.
- (d) Figures are shown with the group, setting and time frame to which they apply.
6. Audience
Readers bring different histories and capacities; examples are framed as examples rather than prescriptions. Our main audience is adult men over 35 in Indonesia, though anyone may read the material. We take into account local factors such as heat, humidity and commuting patterns when we choose examples. Each article reminds readers to consider their own health background with a qualified professional. Examples avoid assuming a particular income, gym membership or set of equipment, and they include options that can be done at home or outdoors. Readers who are returning to activity after illness or injury are encouraged to seek professional input first.
- (a) Examples reflect local conditions without assuming access to specific facilities.
- (b) Articles describe options at different levels of experience.
7. Review
Material is reviewed for clarity, safety boundaries, source quality and internal consistency. Every article passes through a drafting stage, a second-editor review and a final check of citations and dates. Reviewers look specifically for statements that could be read as individual medical advice and rewrite them. Articles are reviewed again at least once a year, or sooner if new guidance is published. A reviewer who has a connection to a topic does not carry out the second-editor review of that article. The date of the most recent review is shown on the page, and it changes only when an editor has actually re-read the article against its sources.
- (a) Stage one: drafting by the author against a source list.
- (b) Stage two: second-editor review for clarity, safety and framing.
- (c) Stage three: final check of citations, dates and links.
8. Corrections
Substantive corrections are dated and described when they change a reader’s understanding. Minor typographical fixes are made without a note. A correction appears at the foot of the page with the date and a short explanation of what changed and why. We aim to acknowledge a correction request within five business days and to complete a review within 30 calendar days. If a statement is found to be materially wrong, it is corrected in the text itself and not simply added to a note at the bottom. Where a correction affects an article that has been widely linked, the page keeps its address so that earlier links continue to work.
- (a) Substantive corrections are dated and explained.
- (b) Typographical fixes are made without a note.
9. Reader feedback
Contact the editorial desk with a citation, page address and concise description of the concern. You can write through the contact page or telephone +62 813 9587 4123 between 09:00 and 17:00 Western Indonesia Time on weekdays. Constructive disagreement is welcome, and we read each message even when we cannot reply individually. Feedback that leads to a change is acknowledged in the correction note where appropriate. Letters may be sent to Palmus, Jl. Raya Cilandak KKO No.17, RT.1/RW.5, Ragunan, Ps. Minggu, Kota Jakarta Selatan, Daerah Khusus Ibukota Jakarta 12560, Indonesia. Messages are kept for 24 months in line with the privacy policy, and we do not publish a reader’s name or message without separate permission.
- (a) Include the page address, the passage in question and a source where possible.
- (b) Expect an acknowledgement within five business days.
10. Change log
This policy was reviewed and republished on 5 October 2026 after a standards review completed in September 2026. Earlier editions are retained for 36 months and can be supplied on request. A short record of dated changes is kept here so that readers can see how the standards have developed. The policy is reviewed at least once a year, and sooner if the way the site is funded or produced changes. Readers who think the practice on the site differs from the policy described here are encouraged to tell us.
- (a) 1 July 2026: sourcing and attribution standards written down for the first time.
- (b) 18 September 2026: standards review completed, including second-editor checks.
- (c) 5 October 2026: policy republished with expanded notes on language, review and corrections.