August 24, 2025 • 25 mins
Ever feel bombarded by conflicting health advice online? From raw carrot salads supposedly detoxing estrogen to cold plunges magically melting fat, Dr. Jules cuts through the noise with science-based clarity in this eye-opening episode.
We're living in an era where everyone with a social media account claims expertise in hormones, detoxification, and biohacking. But there's a vast difference between what sounds scientific and what actually holds up under scrutiny. Dr. Jules delivers three powerful thinking tools that will transform how you evaluate health claims: understanding that mechanism doesn't equal meaningful outcome, recognizing that anecdotes aren't evidence, and acknowledging that short-term hype rarely translates to long-term health.
The episode systematically examines trending wellness fads including hormone-balancing smoothies, chlorophyll water, mouth taping, and cold plunging — revealing what limited evidence exists behind the marketing hype. You'll learn to recognize how wellness influencers misuse scientific concepts, cherry-pick studies, and exploit mechanisms that sound impressive but deliver minimal real-world benefits.
Most importantly, Dr. Jules emphasizes that while you're chasing trendy biohacks, you might be neglecting the fundamentals that deliver exponentially greater health benefits: quality sleep, stress management, exercise, plant-forward nutrition, social connection, and avoiding toxins.
Whether you've been curious about the latest TikTok health trend or simply want to become more discerning about health information, this episode provides a practical framework for critical thinking. Share this episode with someone who might be vulnerable to health hype, and together let's make critical thinking about health claims cool again.
Go check out my website for tons of free resources on how to transition towards a healthier diet and lifestyle.
You can download my free plant-based recipes eBook and a ton of other free resources by visiting the Digital Downloads tab of my website at https://www.plantbaseddrjules.com/shop
Don't forget to check out my blog at https://www.plantbaseddrjules.com/blog
You can also watch my educational videos on YouTube at https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCMpkQRXb7G-StAotV0dmahQ
Check out my upcoming live events and free eCourse, where you'll learn more about how to create delicious plant-based recipes: https://www.plantbaseddrjules.com/
Go follow me on social media by visiting my Facebook page and Instagram accounts
https://www.facebook.com/plantbaseddrjules
https://www.instagram.com/plantbased_dr_jules/
Last but not least, the best way to show your support and to help me spread my message is to subscribe to my podcast and to leave a 5 star review on Apple and Spotify!
Thanks so much!
Peace, love, plants!
Dr. Jules
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:11):
Hey everyone, welcome to Season 2 of the Dr Jules
Plant-Based Podcast, where wediscuss everything from
plant-based nutrition to themain pillars of lifestyle
medicine.
Hey everyone, welcome back toanother episode of the podcast.
Today is going to be a fun one.
We are going to be debunkinghealth trends and we're going to
(00:34):
talk about the signs that youneed to spot the hype.
Now there's nothing thatpresses my buttons more when I
see someone who has no expertisein a certain field selling BS.
Supplements, hacks, trends orfads Everything from
(00:58):
hormone-balancing smoothies, rawcallot salad for estrogen detox
detox or cold plunging for fatloss.
Some of these trends soundexciting, some feel empowering,
but some just fall apart underthe microscope.
Now, I applaud anyone who'sresearching things that can
(01:21):
improve their health, but thepeople that I do not applaud are
those who make hyperbolicclaims in order to profit from
vulnerable people looking toimprove themselves.
So in today's episode, I'llteach you how to think
critically about wellness trends, using real science, so that
(01:45):
you can spot helpful ones andavoid the hype.
Now the internet is very loudand everyone suddenly seems to
be a hormone expert, a detoxcoach or a biohacker, but
(02:08):
there's a big difference betweenwhat sounds scientific and what
is scientific.
Now, the truth is that many ofthese trends are actually based
on misinterpreted mechanisms,personal anecdotes or
cherry-picked studies.
So, instead of just debunking,I want to give you tools and a
(02:30):
way to think critically soyou're not left confused the
next time someone on TikToktells you to eat raw liver with
maple syrup, claiming that it'sgoing to cure your chronic
disease.
Now, the three thinking toolsthat I want to give to you today
are well, number one mechanismdoesn't mean meaningful outcome.
(02:55):
Number two anecdote doesn'tmean evidence.
And number three short-termhype doesn't mean long-term
health.
Now, just because a nutrientdoes something in a petri dish
doesn't mean that it's going tohelp when you eat it.
And we see all of thesemechanistic data used against us
(03:18):
in all sorts of differentscenarios.
I'll give you an example.
In all sorts of differentscenarios.
I'll give you an example.
I did a full episode on Red Dye40, where it was banned because
, at super high dose, in apowdered form in rodents, it
could increase the risk ofthyroid cancer, where humans
(03:40):
would have to eat pounds of itdaily for it to have possible
toxic implications.
The same thing goes foraspartame, a sweetener that we
find in diet soda, for example,where, at ultra-high doses, it
(04:02):
increases the rates of braincancer in rodents.
But for actual adults or humans, they would have to consume
something like 40 milligrams perkilogram, which equates to
dozens and dozens of diet sodasevery single day.
To see a potential lethal dose?
(04:22):
Now day to see a potentiallethal dose?
Now I'll give you the exampleof Tylenol.
Right At high dose, Tylenolwill kill you.
At moderate dose it's perfectlysafe.
It may actually help reduceyour fever and your headache,
but if you take 0.2 milligramsof Tylenol it will do absolutely
(04:44):
nothing.
So, using this as an example,if aspartame in rodents causes
brain cancer and people areusing that data to then
fearmonger about diet soda, wellthen we should be avoiding
(05:04):
Tylenol as well when we have aheadache, because it kills
people at high doses.
But it actually, for a lot ofpeople, is quite useful at
studied doses.
Using mechanisms in animals orrodents or what happens in
mechanistic studies at superhigh doses and then
(05:27):
extrapolating that to fearmonger in normal consumed doses
in adults is quite sad and mostscientists can see right through
that.
But I understand that for thelayperson that's not necessarily
educated in the sciences or indifferent scientific studies,
(05:48):
this can be very confusing toread online.
The second thing is thatanecdote is not evidence and
stories are powerful andemotions are involved, but
stories aren't science evolved,but stories aren't science now.
(06:10):
When I transitioned to aplant-based diet, a lot of
things went better for me.
My allergies went away, myasthma got better, my eczema
went away.
I've never had another bout ofcholinergic angioedema or
chronic urticaria since.
But that doesn't mean that thisthat's going to happen to
everyone who has the sameconditions as I have.
Our contexts are different, ourstress levels are different,
(06:34):
our genetic predispositions aredifferent, our diets are
different.
We are different.
So it's impossible for me toassume that my anecdote,
although it relates to a lot ofpeople, it's impossible to claim
and it's actually quitedangerous to claim that this is
(06:54):
going to happen to everyone whogoes plant-based and also
short-term hype is not equal tolong-term help, and feeling
better for a week doesn't meanthat something is sustainable or
safe.
Now we do have studies showingthat there are benefits of coal
(07:15):
plunging, but what people don'tknow is that a proper coal
plunge is quite a hassle tooperate, that a proper cold
plunge is quite a hassle tooperate.
Either it costs thousands ofdollars or, if you make one at
home.
It may increase mood for a fewhours or days after doing it,
but you are going to have to doit over the long term.
(07:37):
What people fail to understandis that eating healthier,
sleeping better, managing yourstress and exercising and
connecting with people hasexponentially more impact on
short-term and long-term healththan cold plunging.
Now I don't want to sound likea hypocrite.
(07:59):
I have a cold plunge at homeand when I'm in the mood to
challenge myself and to defy mylimits and to break mental
barriers, I really enjoy doingit.
But that being said, killing itwith water, washing it, finding
the time and waking up in themorning at 6 am and jumping in a
(08:21):
cold plunge is not thatenjoyable for me and honestly,
I'd prefer going to run a 20Kbecause I know that that level
of discomfort I can reproduceduring a longer run.
But I'll have a better time andI'll have exponentially more
benefit.
If you're spending all yourtime in a cold plunge but yet
(08:46):
you're sleeping five hours pernight, you are stepping over
dollars to pick up pennies.
You are majoring in the minors.
The most important thing is tounderstand what really impacts
short-term and long-term healthand to try to prioritize these
things first to try toprioritize these things.
(09:10):
First, let's talk about a fewviral trends that I've seen
online lately.
I've seen raw carrot salad forestrogen detoxing, and the claim
is that raw carrots bind excessestrogen and balance your
hormones.
Now, the truth is that thisclaim is based on the fact that
carrots do contain insolublefiber, which does help bind some
of the estrogen metabolites inthe gut, but that's not unique
(09:34):
to carrots.
Any fiber-rich vegetable can dothis, and there's no evidence
that a raw carrot a daysignificantly impacts hormone
levels.
Now, eat your carrots, for sure, but don't expect them to
replace lifestyle, fiberdiversity, fiber quantity or
clinical support if you need it.
(09:56):
Now, what about cold plunges,burning fat and resetting your
hormone?
Now, the claim is that coldexposure boosts metabolism and
brown fat activity, leading tofat loss and hormone
optimization.
Now, the truth is, yes, colddoes activate brown adipose
tissue.
It can burn calories, but theeffect is modest, not magical,
(10:21):
and cortisol and adrenaline willspike, which isn't actually
helpful for everyone, especiallyduring a burnout or during
menopause or when your body'snot fully recovered.
Now, cold plunges can beinvigorating, but they're not a
fat loss fix.
Now, if you love it, go for it,but don't expect dramatic
(10:45):
metabolic changes and I thinkthat sleeping seven to nine
hours per night, meditating,managing your stress, connecting
socially, exercising and eatinga plant-forward diet is
hundreds-fold more importantthan cold plunging.
(11:06):
Now another trend that I've seenresurface online lately is
mouth taping.
Now the claim is that mouthtape promotes nasal breathing,
better sleep and less snoring.
The truth is that nasalbreathing is actually great, but
if you snore and have sleepapnea or sinus issues, taping
(11:27):
your mouth can actually bedangerous, and there's minimal
evidence on long-term benefitand no safety screening involved
in most of these viral videos.
Instead of taping your mouthshut, maybe focus on optimizing
nasal airflow, sleep hygiene andgetting screened for sleep
(11:48):
apnea.
If you're waking up tired Now,when I go out for a 10K run, I
do nasal breathe.
There are some benefits, butI'm not sure that taping your
mouth shut during sleep is theway to go for most people.
Now what abouthormone-balancing smoothies?
(12:10):
The claim is that this blend ofmaca, flax, almond milk and nut
butter will balance yourhormones naturally.
Now the truth is that maca is aroot with some good evidence
for libido and mood, but not forhormone regulation per se, and
flax is healthy and isrecommended to consume daily.
(12:31):
But again, it's about the totaldietary pattern, not one
magical blend, and you can'tbalance hormones with a drink.
Can't balance hormones with adrink, especially if you're
sleeping is off, your stressmanagement is off and your diet
is off.
Now drink your smoothie.
(12:52):
It's a great way to get anutrient-dense meal inside of
you.
A lot of nutrient variety canbe packed in a smoothie, as well
as Nutrient variety can bepacked in a smoothie, as well as
phytochemicals and fiber.
But don't let marketingconvince you that a smoothie is
a prescription no-transcript.
(13:19):
Now, another trend that I'veseen is something called
chlorophyll water.
Now, the claim is thatchlorophyll neutralizes body
odor and detoxes your body fromthe inside out.
Now, the truth is that there'sone small study showing that
topical chlorophyllin may reducebody odor in some people with a
(13:40):
very specific yet rare medicalcondition in some people with a
very specific yet rare medicalcondition.
But chlorophyll in waterthere's no solid evidence that
it changes body odor in normal,healthy people.
And again, your liver and yourkidneys are already detoxing
like pros.
Drink water and eat leafygreens.
That's your chlorophyll fix Forfree.
(14:03):
You do not need to be fallingfor these scams.
Now.
There are a lot of things thatthese trends do get right, and
that's the intention of wantingto feel better, of wanting to
take control of your health,wanting a solution that feels
(14:25):
empowering.
But long-term health isn't sexy.
It's daily habits that yousustain over time Whole food
variety, variety of colors,movement, sleep, stress
reduction, reduction, socialsupport.
When you have thesefundamentals in place, you
(14:48):
become very less vulnerable tothe hype and grounded in what
actually works.
There are different types ofstudies that have different
types of conclusions and thesestudies, like weight in a
balance, can be kind of put onthis type of pedestal that we
(15:10):
call the hierarchy of proof.
Now imagine this hypotheticalscenario Someone maybe breaks
into a corner store and robs theplace.
Now, when investigating, thepolice will look at whether or
not we have different levels ofproof to try to find who robbed
(15:35):
the place.
Now the first thing will beanecdotes Is there anyone who
heard anything or is thereanyone who saw anything?
Obviously, you understand thatpeople who heard the rumor that
maybe John robbed that place,that's maybe a little less
reliable than people who claimto have seen John rob the place.
(15:58):
So there's a difference betweenhearing about it and actually
seeing it.
So there's a difference betweenhearing about it and actually
seeing it.
But there's still some biasthat's there and some people
sometimes they think they sawsomething and they think they
saw someone who looked like John, but it wasn't actually John.
So what we want to rely on aremaybe other forms of evidence
(16:20):
like, for example, cameras, orshoe prints or fingerprints or
DNA, for example, cameras.
Cameras is a good example of howproof can exist according to a
certain hierarchy or on aspectrum.
Maybe the store across thestreet has a low-definition
(16:43):
black or white camera.
It's a little bit blurry, butthe shirt and the hat and the
shoes and the face maybe looklike John just a little.
Obviously, there are morereliable ways to prove that John
robbed the store.
Maybe closer, the streetlighthad a camera.
(17:03):
Closer, the streetlight had acamera and that was a camera
that's in color and still alittle bit blurred.
But yeah, john does have thatcolored shirt and that colored
hat.
Now what about the neighboringstore who has a high def camera
getting a clear shot of John'sface?
(17:23):
It's not blurred, it's inperfect 1080p.
The colors match perfectly, theface matches perfectly.
It's clearly John who robbedthe store.
Now, everyone would agree thatthe different quality cameras
exist on what we call ahierarchy of proof or a spectrum
, from low quality of proof tohigh quality of proof.
(17:50):
Now it just so happens that thesame thing exists for scientific
studies, with the best studiesbeing systematic reviews or
meta-analyses.
Then we have randomizedcontrolled trials and clinical
guidelines and then we haveprospective cohort studies done
(18:10):
on millions of people.
Then maybe we have these samestudies done on less people and
then we start diving into themaybe poorer conduct studies or
lower levels of proof like, forexample, mechanistic studies or
expert opinions or personalanecdotes or petri dishes.
(18:33):
Obviously a study on soyshowing that soy is dangerous in
rodents may be a cause forconcerns in humans if we don't
have any data on humans.
But if we have generations ofstudies on soy and how it
(18:56):
impacts human health and we'vestudied it on hundreds of
thousands of people and itconsistently shows that soy is
protective in terms of reducingchronic disease risk or cancer
rates or cardiovascular diseaseor cholesterol in humans, then
honestly I really don't carewhat the lower levels of studies
(19:18):
are showing.
Now, if the high def clearlyshows and the footprints and the
fingerprints are all pointingin the same direction and all
towards John having robbed thatconvenience store, then I don't
really care that the blurred-outcamera across the street shows
(19:40):
something that doesn't look likeJohn shows something that
doesn't look like John.
When we have multiple lines ofevidence all converging towards
the same thing or the sameconclusion, we can be more sure
that the conclusion is the rightone.
So if you have four differenttypes of cameras, all showing
(20:00):
John Fingerprints, show JohnAnecdotes from people around
showing that John has no alibiand he was in the vicinity of
the store at the time of therobbery, all of these different
lines of proof are convergingtowards John.
Now that same concept can beapplied to scientific studies.
(20:22):
If we have multiple lines ofproof randomized controlled
trials, mendelian randomization,systematic reviews and
meta-analysis all showing thatLDL cholesterol is a causal
factor in atherosclerosis and incardiovascular disease, then I
don't care if a very ultra lowlevel study showed that it
(20:47):
wasn't related.
Like if all cameras and alllines of proof are showing that
LDL cholesterol increases heartattack risk, then really who
cares about that poor qualitypetri level animal study that
(21:07):
showed that?
Maybe it doesn't right?
But the thing is, is that this,these different types of studies
do exist out there and that'swhy often people will cherry
pick a study that fits theirnarrative.
Now obviously, john's defenselawyers are going to point
towards that blurry camera thatreally shows someone that looks
(21:31):
different from John, right?
So the same thing happensonline when people are
demonizing red dyes.
They're not talking about thefact that it was studied in
rodents but deemed safe inadults.
When they're pointing ataspartame, they're not
mentioning that it was hundredsof times the dose needed to
(21:54):
cause harms in humans that arebeing used in rodents.
We are not mice and the waysthat food impacts rodents is not
the same that would happen inadults if we would be to consume
the typical levels that weconsume during a typical day.
(22:17):
Right.
It's easy to fearmonger, it'seasy to make exaggerated claims
and it's particularly easy touse low quality science to back
up the story that will supportyour supplement or whatever
(22:38):
behavior you're trying to sell,and that's why people are
confused.
Where we have two differentexperts that are saying
completely different things,people will typically believe
the one who appears moreconfident or is a better
communicator.
Now, the reality is is thatdoctors and scientists are
(23:01):
typically too busy to beinfluencing people on social
media and when they are, theytypically are very poor
communicators of the science,and that's why I don't blame
patients for being confused.
86% of people consume theirnews from a tablet or a
(23:22):
smartphone, and that's wherepeople are getting their health
advice from as well.
The general public is notreading scientific journals.
They're reading Instagram andFacebook and TikTok and YouTube,
and on these social mediaplatforms you can find infinite
numbers of doctors and wellnessinfluencers that all say
(23:46):
contradicting things.
It's important to understand howto think critically, how to
interpret science and, mostly,understanding that health isn't
built around fads.
Hype isn't built around fads,hype, quick fixes or trends.
It's built on the six lifestylepillars, which are eating a
(24:10):
healthy, plant-forward diet,exercising, managing your stress
, prioritizing good sleephygiene and connecting socially
with other people, while youavoid consuming known toxins
Right on.
If this episode has helped youfeel more confident in
(24:33):
navigating health informationonline, please share it with a
friend.
Let's try to make criticalthinking cool again.
Let's try to make criticalthinking cool again.
Thanks for being here.
Thanks for tuning in.
We'll see you at the nextepisode.
Peace, hey everyone.
(25:06):
Go check out my websiteplantbaseddodrjulescom to find
free downloadable resources, andremember that you can find me
on Facebook and Instagram at DrJules Cormier, and on YouTube at
Plant Based Dr Jules.
Thank you.
Hey everyone, welcome to Season 2 of the Dr Jules
Plant-Based Podcast, where wediscuss everything from
plant-based nutrition to themain pillars of lifestyle
medicine.
Hey everyone, welcome back toanother episode of the podcast.
Today is going to be a fun one.
We are going to be debunkinghealth trends and we're going to
(00:34):
talk about the signs that youneed to spot the hype.
Now there's nothing thatpresses my buttons more when I
see someone who has no expertisein a certain field selling BS.
Supplements, hacks, trends orfads Everything from
(00:58):
hormone-balancing smoothies, rawcallot salad for estrogen detox
detox or cold plunging for fatloss.
Some of these trends soundexciting, some feel empowering,
but some just fall apart underthe microscope.
Now, I applaud anyone who'sresearching things that can
(01:21):
improve their health, but thepeople that I do not applaud are
those who make hyperbolicclaims in order to profit from
vulnerable people looking toimprove themselves.
So in today's episode, I'llteach you how to think
critically about wellness trends, using real science, so that
(01:45):
you can spot helpful ones andavoid the hype.
Now the internet is very loudand everyone suddenly seems to
be a hormone expert, a detoxcoach or a biohacker, but
(02:08):
there's a big difference betweenwhat sounds scientific and what
is scientific.
Now, the truth is that many ofthese trends are actually based
on misinterpreted mechanisms,personal anecdotes or
cherry-picked studies.
So, instead of just debunking,I want to give you tools and a
(02:30):
way to think critically soyou're not left confused the
next time someone on TikToktells you to eat raw liver with
maple syrup, claiming that it'sgoing to cure your chronic
disease.
Now, the three thinking toolsthat I want to give to you today
are well, number one mechanismdoesn't mean meaningful outcome.
(02:55):
Number two anecdote doesn'tmean evidence.
And number three short-termhype doesn't mean long-term
health.
Now, just because a nutrientdoes something in a petri dish
doesn't mean that it's going tohelp when you eat it.
And we see all of thesemechanistic data used against us
(03:18):
in all sorts of differentscenarios.
I'll give you an example.
In all sorts of differentscenarios.
I'll give you an example.
I did a full episode on Red Dye40, where it was banned because
, at super high dose, in apowdered form in rodents, it
could increase the risk ofthyroid cancer, where humans
(03:40):
would have to eat pounds of itdaily for it to have possible
toxic implications.
The same thing goes foraspartame, a sweetener that we
find in diet soda, for example,where, at ultra-high doses, it
(04:02):
increases the rates of braincancer in rodents.
But for actual adults or humans, they would have to consume
something like 40 milligrams perkilogram, which equates to
dozens and dozens of diet sodasevery single day.
To see a potential lethal dose?
(04:22):
Now day to see a potentiallethal dose?
Now I'll give you the exampleof Tylenol.
Right At high dose, Tylenolwill kill you.
At moderate dose it's perfectlysafe.
It may actually help reduceyour fever and your headache,
but if you take 0.2 milligramsof Tylenol it will do absolutely
(04:44):
nothing.
So, using this as an example,if aspartame in rodents causes
brain cancer and people areusing that data to then
fearmonger about diet soda, wellthen we should be avoiding
(05:04):
Tylenol as well when we have aheadache, because it kills
people at high doses.
But it actually, for a lot ofpeople, is quite useful at
studied doses.
Using mechanisms in animals orrodents or what happens in
mechanistic studies at superhigh doses and then
(05:27):
extrapolating that to fearmonger in normal consumed doses
in adults is quite sad and mostscientists can see right through
that.
But I understand that for thelayperson that's not necessarily
educated in the sciences or indifferent scientific studies,
(05:48):
this can be very confusing toread online.
The second thing is thatanecdote is not evidence and
stories are powerful andemotions are involved, but
stories aren't science evolved,but stories aren't science now.
(06:10):
When I transitioned to aplant-based diet, a lot of
things went better for me.
My allergies went away, myasthma got better, my eczema
went away.
I've never had another bout ofcholinergic angioedema or
chronic urticaria since.
But that doesn't mean that thisthat's going to happen to
everyone who has the sameconditions as I have.
Our contexts are different, ourstress levels are different,
(06:34):
our genetic predispositions aredifferent, our diets are
different.
We are different.
So it's impossible for me toassume that my anecdote,
although it relates to a lot ofpeople, it's impossible to claim
and it's actually quitedangerous to claim that this is
(06:54):
going to happen to everyone whogoes plant-based and also
short-term hype is not equal tolong-term help, and feeling
better for a week doesn't meanthat something is sustainable or
safe.
Now we do have studies showingthat there are benefits of coal
(07:15):
plunging, but what people don'tknow is that a proper coal
plunge is quite a hassle tooperate, that a proper cold
plunge is quite a hassle tooperate.
Either it costs thousands ofdollars or, if you make one at
home.
It may increase mood for a fewhours or days after doing it,
but you are going to have to doit over the long term.
(07:37):
What people fail to understandis that eating healthier,
sleeping better, managing yourstress and exercising and
connecting with people hasexponentially more impact on
short-term and long-term healththan cold plunging.
Now I don't want to sound likea hypocrite.
(07:59):
I have a cold plunge at homeand when I'm in the mood to
challenge myself and to defy mylimits and to break mental
barriers, I really enjoy doingit.
But that being said, killing itwith water, washing it, finding
the time and waking up in themorning at 6 am and jumping in a
(08:21):
cold plunge is not thatenjoyable for me and honestly,
I'd prefer going to run a 20Kbecause I know that that level
of discomfort I can reproduceduring a longer run.
But I'll have a better time andI'll have exponentially more
benefit.
If you're spending all yourtime in a cold plunge but yet
(08:46):
you're sleeping five hours pernight, you are stepping over
dollars to pick up pennies.
You are majoring in the minors.
The most important thing is tounderstand what really impacts
short-term and long-term healthand to try to prioritize these
things first to try toprioritize these things.
(09:10):
First, let's talk about a fewviral trends that I've seen
online lately.
I've seen raw carrot salad forestrogen detoxing, and the claim
is that raw carrots bind excessestrogen and balance your
hormones.
Now, the truth is that thisclaim is based on the fact that
carrots do contain insolublefiber, which does help bind some
of the estrogen metabolites inthe gut, but that's not unique
(09:34):
to carrots.
Any fiber-rich vegetable can dothis, and there's no evidence
that a raw carrot a daysignificantly impacts hormone
levels.
Now, eat your carrots, for sure, but don't expect them to
replace lifestyle, fiberdiversity, fiber quantity or
clinical support if you need it.
(09:56):
Now, what about cold plunges,burning fat and resetting your
hormone?
Now, the claim is that coldexposure boosts metabolism and
brown fat activity, leading tofat loss and hormone
optimization.
Now, the truth is, yes, colddoes activate brown adipose
tissue.
It can burn calories, but theeffect is modest, not magical,
(10:21):
and cortisol and adrenaline willspike, which isn't actually
helpful for everyone, especiallyduring a burnout or during
menopause or when your body'snot fully recovered.
Now, cold plunges can beinvigorating, but they're not a
fat loss fix.
Now, if you love it, go for it,but don't expect dramatic
(10:45):
metabolic changes and I thinkthat sleeping seven to nine
hours per night, meditating,managing your stress, connecting
socially, exercising and eatinga plant-forward diet is
hundreds-fold more importantthan cold plunging.
(11:06):
Now another trend that I've seenresurface online lately is
mouth taping.
Now the claim is that mouthtape promotes nasal breathing,
better sleep and less snoring.
The truth is that nasalbreathing is actually great, but
if you snore and have sleepapnea or sinus issues, taping
(11:27):
your mouth can actually bedangerous, and there's minimal
evidence on long-term benefitand no safety screening involved
in most of these viral videos.
Instead of taping your mouthshut, maybe focus on optimizing
nasal airflow, sleep hygiene andgetting screened for sleep
(11:48):
apnea.
If you're waking up tired Now,when I go out for a 10K run, I
do nasal breathe.
There are some benefits, butI'm not sure that taping your
mouth shut during sleep is theway to go for most people.
Now what abouthormone-balancing smoothies?
(12:10):
The claim is that this blend ofmaca, flax, almond milk and nut
butter will balance yourhormones naturally.
Now the truth is that maca is aroot with some good evidence
for libido and mood, but not forhormone regulation per se, and
flax is healthy and isrecommended to consume daily.
(12:31):
But again, it's about the totaldietary pattern, not one
magical blend, and you can'tbalance hormones with a drink.
Can't balance hormones with adrink, especially if you're
sleeping is off, your stressmanagement is off and your diet
is off.
Now drink your smoothie.
(12:52):
It's a great way to get anutrient-dense meal inside of
you.
A lot of nutrient variety canbe packed in a smoothie, as well
as Nutrient variety can bepacked in a smoothie, as well as
phytochemicals and fiber.
But don't let marketingconvince you that a smoothie is
a prescription no-transcript.
(13:19):
Now, another trend that I'veseen is something called
chlorophyll water.
Now, the claim is thatchlorophyll neutralizes body
odor and detoxes your body fromthe inside out.
Now, the truth is that there'sone small study showing that
topical chlorophyllin may reducebody odor in some people with a
(13:40):
very specific yet rare medicalcondition in some people with a
very specific yet rare medicalcondition.
But chlorophyll in waterthere's no solid evidence that
it changes body odor in normal,healthy people.
And again, your liver and yourkidneys are already detoxing
like pros.
Drink water and eat leafygreens.
That's your chlorophyll fix Forfree.
(14:03):
You do not need to be fallingfor these scams.
Now.
There are a lot of things thatthese trends do get right, and
that's the intention of wantingto feel better, of wanting to
take control of your health,wanting a solution that feels
(14:25):
empowering.
But long-term health isn't sexy.
It's daily habits that yousustain over time Whole food
variety, variety of colors,movement, sleep, stress
reduction, reduction, socialsupport.
When you have thesefundamentals in place, you
(14:48):
become very less vulnerable tothe hype and grounded in what
actually works.
There are different types ofstudies that have different
types of conclusions and thesestudies, like weight in a
balance, can be kind of put onthis type of pedestal that we
(15:10):
call the hierarchy of proof.
Now imagine this hypotheticalscenario Someone maybe breaks
into a corner store and robs theplace.
Now, when investigating, thepolice will look at whether or
not we have different levels ofproof to try to find who robbed
(15:35):
the place.
Now the first thing will beanecdotes Is there anyone who
heard anything or is thereanyone who saw anything?
Obviously, you understand thatpeople who heard the rumor that
maybe John robbed that place,that's maybe a little less
reliable than people who claimto have seen John rob the place.
(15:58):
So there's a difference betweenhearing about it and actually
seeing it.
So there's a difference betweenhearing about it and actually
seeing it.
But there's still some biasthat's there and some people
sometimes they think they sawsomething and they think they
saw someone who looked like John, but it wasn't actually John.
So what we want to rely on aremaybe other forms of evidence
(16:20):
like, for example, cameras, orshoe prints or fingerprints or
DNA, for example, cameras.
Cameras is a good example of howproof can exist according to a
certain hierarchy or on aspectrum.
Maybe the store across thestreet has a low-definition
(16:43):
black or white camera.
It's a little bit blurry, butthe shirt and the hat and the
shoes and the face maybe looklike John just a little.
Obviously, there are morereliable ways to prove that John
robbed the store.
Maybe closer, the streetlighthad a camera.
(17:03):
Closer, the streetlight had acamera and that was a camera
that's in color and still alittle bit blurred.
But yeah, john does have thatcolored shirt and that colored
hat.
Now what about the neighboringstore who has a high def camera
getting a clear shot of John'sface?
(17:23):
It's not blurred, it's inperfect 1080p.
The colors match perfectly, theface matches perfectly.
It's clearly John who robbedthe store.
Now, everyone would agree thatthe different quality cameras
exist on what we call ahierarchy of proof or a spectrum
, from low quality of proof tohigh quality of proof.
(17:50):
Now it just so happens that thesame thing exists for scientific
studies, with the best studiesbeing systematic reviews or
meta-analyses.
Then we have randomizedcontrolled trials and clinical
guidelines and then we haveprospective cohort studies done
(18:10):
on millions of people.
Then maybe we have these samestudies done on less people and
then we start diving into themaybe poorer conduct studies or
lower levels of proof like, forexample, mechanistic studies or
expert opinions or personalanecdotes or petri dishes.
(18:33):
Obviously a study on soyshowing that soy is dangerous in
rodents may be a cause forconcerns in humans if we don't
have any data on humans.
But if we have generations ofstudies on soy and how it
(18:56):
impacts human health and we'vestudied it on hundreds of
thousands of people and itconsistently shows that soy is
protective in terms of reducingchronic disease risk or cancer
rates or cardiovascular diseaseor cholesterol in humans, then
honestly I really don't carewhat the lower levels of studies
(19:18):
are showing.
Now, if the high def clearlyshows and the footprints and the
fingerprints are all pointingin the same direction and all
towards John having robbed thatconvenience store, then I don't
really care that the blurred-outcamera across the street shows
(19:40):
something that doesn't look likeJohn shows something that
doesn't look like John.
When we have multiple lines ofevidence all converging towards
the same thing or the sameconclusion, we can be more sure
that the conclusion is the rightone.
So if you have four differenttypes of cameras, all showing
(20:00):
John Fingerprints, show JohnAnecdotes from people around
showing that John has no alibiand he was in the vicinity of
the store at the time of therobbery, all of these different
lines of proof are convergingtowards John.
Now that same concept can beapplied to scientific studies.
(20:22):
If we have multiple lines ofproof randomized controlled
trials, mendelian randomization,systematic reviews and
meta-analysis all showing thatLDL cholesterol is a causal
factor in atherosclerosis and incardiovascular disease, then I
don't care if a very ultra lowlevel study showed that it
(20:47):
wasn't related.
Like if all cameras and alllines of proof are showing that
LDL cholesterol increases heartattack risk, then really who
cares about that poor qualitypetri level animal study that
(21:07):
showed that?
Maybe it doesn't right?
But the thing is, is that this,these different types of studies
do exist out there and that'swhy often people will cherry
pick a study that fits theirnarrative.
Now obviously, john's defenselawyers are going to point
towards that blurry camera thatreally shows someone that looks
(21:31):
different from John, right?
So the same thing happensonline when people are
demonizing red dyes.
They're not talking about thefact that it was studied in
rodents but deemed safe inadults.
When they're pointing ataspartame, they're not
mentioning that it was hundredsof times the dose needed to
(21:54):
cause harms in humans that arebeing used in rodents.
We are not mice and the waysthat food impacts rodents is not
the same that would happen inadults if we would be to consume
the typical levels that weconsume during a typical day.
(22:17):
Right.
It's easy to fearmonger, it'seasy to make exaggerated claims
and it's particularly easy touse low quality science to back
up the story that will supportyour supplement or whatever
(22:38):
behavior you're trying to sell,and that's why people are
confused.
Where we have two differentexperts that are saying
completely different things,people will typically believe
the one who appears moreconfident or is a better
communicator.
Now, the reality is is thatdoctors and scientists are
(23:01):
typically too busy to beinfluencing people on social
media and when they are, theytypically are very poor
communicators of the science,and that's why I don't blame
patients for being confused.
86% of people consume theirnews from a tablet or a
(23:22):
smartphone, and that's wherepeople are getting their health
advice from as well.
The general public is notreading scientific journals.
They're reading Instagram andFacebook and TikTok and YouTube,
and on these social mediaplatforms you can find infinite
numbers of doctors and wellnessinfluencers that all say
(23:46):
contradicting things.
It's important to understand howto think critically, how to
interpret science and, mostly,understanding that health isn't
built around fads.
Hype isn't built around fads,hype, quick fixes or trends.
It's built on the six lifestylepillars, which are eating a
(24:10):
healthy, plant-forward diet,exercising, managing your stress
, prioritizing good sleephygiene and connecting socially
with other people, while youavoid consuming known toxins
Right on.
If this episode has helped youfeel more confident in
(24:33):
navigating health informationonline, please share it with a
friend.
Let's try to make criticalthinking cool again.
Let's try to make criticalthinking cool again.
Thanks for being here.
Thanks for tuning in.
We'll see you at the nextepisode.
Peace, hey everyone.
(25:06):
Go check out my websiteplantbaseddodrjulescom to find
free downloadable resources, andremember that you can find me
on Facebook and Instagram at DrJules Cormier, and on YouTube at
Plant Based Dr Jules.
Thank you.
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
New Heights with Jason & Travis Kelce
Football’s funniest family duo — Jason Kelce of the Philadelphia Eagles and Travis Kelce of the Kansas City Chiefs — team up to provide next-level access to life in the league as it unfolds. The two brothers and Super Bowl champions drop weekly insights about the weekly slate of games and share their INSIDE perspectives on trending NFL news and sports headlines. They also endlessly rag on each other as brothers do, chat the latest in pop culture and welcome some very popular and well-known friends to chat with them. Check out new episodes every Wednesday. Follow New Heights on the Wondery App, YouTube or wherever you get your podcasts. You can listen to new episodes early and ad-free, and get exclusive content on Wondery+. Join Wondery+ in the Wondery App, Apple Podcasts or Spotify. And join our new membership for a unique fan experience by going to the New Heights YouTube channel now!
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.