One of the biggest challenges over the years has been how to point out inaccuracies without antagonizing people so there's dialogue and collective improvement rather than "diet wars". A learning process...
Great review and I agree 100% that selectively presenting evidence is sure to backfire and only harms the credibility of whatever case you're trying to make.
The advocates of the "EAT THIS WAY OR ELSE" type of diets too often "cherry-pick" data that supports their views while ignoring that which contradicts or is ambiguous. I appreciate your candor and objectivity. I trust science because of those qualities, it's the most reliable vehicle we have to unveil the truth.
Dr. Gil is one of the few sane people on here, in my opinion. About half of the doctors on here, have no business giving advice about nutrition to anybody. It's like all they care about is getting more clicks. For example, who but a nutcase would suggest eating a carnivore diet is healthy? Also, people suggesting that diabetes is a condition that's mainly about eating too many carbs, and so the best treatment there is, is eating less of them, is offering overly simplistic advice. It's never a good idea to make important health decisions based on the advice of a stranger on UA-cam, and not seeing a medical specialist. Dr. Nicola Guess is a far better resource, to me. My protein target as an athlete, is high enough that it's hard for me to get enough without protein powders if I don't eat animal products. I have added more nuts and beans over the years and am currently at about 50/50.
So true, the big issue these days is you have to check the study reports and protocols for yourself, money influence so much of what is called "science" today
I think it's fair to say the producers of the series were hoping to portray plant-based diets in a very positive light and they did not hide the muscle loss in the vegan group. They deserve respect for that.
Been there. done that. Vegan, vegetarian, Paleo, Keto, etc etc etc. In the end I am healthier on a diet of variety and eating food that is the least adulterated with chemicals and processing as possible. I culture and ferment, cook from scratch as much as I can, choose brands carefully by research and simply reading labels. I am 75 and “oddly” in spite of having Sjögren’s from 8 years of stressful caregiving for my Alzheimer’s mother, I am amazingly healthy physically and mentally. I also liberally use alternative medicine when the research supports it and don’t bow to pharmaceutical bullying by doctors but do extensive research to get to the real facts. So far, this approach is working well for me. Also mental and emotional health can’t be underestimated. So my motto is Live, Love, Laugh and always be kind.
Excellent!!! Thanks so much for this nuanced, honest review of the Netflix series. I have been happily vegan/plant-based for over 10 years now, but even I, after all these years find myself "put off" by unsubstantiated claims made by so many of the well respected and well meaning leaders in the movement. I've had to come to my own conclusions, digging for valid info in the literature as a non-scientist. I am so glad to have come across you and Chris MacAskill at Plant Chompers!!! ❤
Totally agree! I am also happily plant based (starting my 6th year) and I also find it hard to find reliable evidence-based sources of information. I first started with How not to Die and the Nutrition Facts, but I later realized this is not a un biased source🙈 I am also much more nuanced in my stance towards health benefits of plant-based eating and I am no longer pushing this lifestyle as the holy grail. Also share your appreciation of this channel and the Plant Chompers!❤
Indeed I like this channel and plant choppers as well. But when the book of dr Greger came out you see that they did an interview : from the format you see that there are both (Chris and his wife) big fans. Thus this was not an objective evaluation like in the other videos. It’s my perception and it’s maybe not true but when I read the book « how not to age », it’s the same direction during 600 pages : plants are good and animal products are bad. If you are vegan it reinforces your beliefs. If you are not (my case), you have a feeling like : ok it’s surely better to eat plants (and I was impressed by the power of plants) but there must be some positive things somewhere about eating chicken or eggs or fish ? And as it’s never mentioned, you wonder if there is no cherry picking. I solved this issue by telling myself that the aim was to eat more plant based even if I still ate animal products. And I will try to replace the easy things eg bake cakes without eggs, make creamy dishes with cashews or silken tofu, learn to cook something with tofu and tempeh that my kids accept to eat ….
An informative and interesting review of the Netflix series. One of the things that really struck me when I watched it was the insistence that both the vegan and omnivorous diets were healthy, yet the vegan arm were provided with ultraprocessed food (fake sausages, cheese etc) which are known to be bad for health. This seems most bizarre.
How are they "known" to be bad for health? I'm not doubting you, I just haven't come across this. I love my vegan sausages, eat them 5-6 times a week. LDL is still dropping. Anecdotal, I know.
I didn't notice this, but it's a good point. I myself am clearing as much UPF as possible, out of my diet atm. Vegan four years and I started off eating lots of whole foods and lost 30lbs. As I have added processed foods, like sausages, burgers and cheese back into my diet, the weight has started going back up. So, it's back to the potatoes and veggies for me. 😅
I couldn't even begin to bother with a show like this. First of all, the vegan diet doesn't tell us what someone is eating; it only tells us what they don't eat. The same is true of the omnivore diet. Either one could be a relatively healthy or unhealthy diet depending on what the people on each diet are eating.
The study showed how each diet was designed and what they consisted of. Both are considered to be quite healthy, centered around whole plants, basically diferentiated by whether they contained some meat or not. The study is quite interesting (I haven't watched the documentary). The channel Plant Chompers just released a great video about it, interviewing the scientists behind it. I highly recommend you check it out! Here: ua-cam.com/video/t24BCuXIlZI/v-deo.htmlsi=zcqUaYGyuuGEbAjE
These are the secrets to living more than 116 years from spanish María Branyas, the oldest person in the world: 1. Eat without getting completely full. Eat small amounts of food. This habit consists of eating only what we need, without overdoing it. There is no deprivation of any food, but you do consume those that are less healthy on rare occasions. 2. María eats yogurt every day, but natural, nothing sugary. 3. Stress management. A quiet life. María indicates the need to get closer to people who give us good energy and positivity, and stay away from those who bring the opposite. 4. María has not had any major illness in her 116 years, and she overcame Covid-19 without major consequences.
They aren’t secrets, you are suggesting correlations are causations. As regular viewers of this channel know, outliers and anecdotal evidence is meagre at best. We also don’t know how old she would have been if she didn’t eat yogurt or eat until stuffed as that’s different for everyone. Let’s stick to the science here.
Well said! You have a great way of communicating complex scientific problems to the masses without over-complicating it. Another great quality of yours is you aren't egotistical in relaying your message. Other people seem to want to make themselves sound smarter, rather than relay/explain a point. Thank you! I started watching the show and was immediately disappointed by how persuasive it was. I didn't finish watching it.
I've eaten an omnivore diet for the first 17 years of my life and then switched to a vegan diet. I'm now 54. I can honestly say there's room for improvement in both ways of eating. I had issues when I ate meat and in the first ten years as a vegan. Eating whole foods and drinking filtered water is best while also making sure you're getting adequate omega 3. Stay away from sugar and processed carbs. Also, I've found that eating plenty of fermented foods will keep you regular, more so than increasing your fiber intake. Lastly, exercise is also important. Lots of walking and either free weights or machine work is necessary to maintain your form. That's about it.
I am vegan and I agree with everything that you said in your rant. I want to know the actual facts, and it's so hard these days with each side spouting their propaganda, and then having those narratives parroted online.. There are numerous legit reasons to go vegan, we don't need to be spreading misinformation or half truths.
As a vegan, I also agree. However it seems that propaganda works, so I say fight fire with fire if that's what it takes. I think unbiased high quality work will never make it to the mainstream, especially in a tv format. This hopefully brings exposure for others to do some digging and reflect on their choices.
@@alexkwak7146 Climate friendliness for once (especially if you cut out lamb and beef), also if you have a tendency to eat junk food, people may tend to eat less because of limited choice :) That's among others for sure, just the ones that matter to me.
@@alexkwak7146if we are talking from a health based point of view, there's an amplitude of studies that show alot of benefits if one follows a diet that's whole food and plant based. From lowering cholesterol levels, to overall artery health, to better gut microbiome due to the diversity of veggies consumed etc. Ofc I can't mention everything, but this channel has a lot of videos that study different meta-analysies that have come out surrounding nutrition, so I'd say maybe take a look! Ofc, veganism isn't only about your dietary choices. Veganism is the effort to try to minimize animal suffering and exploitation. Therefore, it's to not pay for animal products in food or clothes or cosmetics, and to actively try to help animals in any way you practically can. It's all about the effort to live a life where animals suffer less because of your choices! So, if you want to get a better understanding of veganism, I would suggest the channel Earthling Ed, he's a very eloquent fellow that would explain such a consent better than I ever would! Hope this helps!
I think that it’s very nice of you of posting that comment. Because it’s rare for people to reflect on their past actions and saying that they could have done something else. 👍
I was impressed that the results were not overwhelming a vegan win, but they still went through with it. Obviously better numbers for vegans, but the real benefits are cumulative over a lifetime. That can't be captured in the format of a Netflix show.
... including an elevated risk of degenerative diseases over those long periods. The picture is never just all roses or all thorns. That's why truthful and comprehensive details are so important in health sciences / nutrition.
It's not about veganism really, it's about emphasizing whole plants as the centerpiece of one's diet. That said, one can eat the healthiest variety of foods for all his life and still succumb to a banal infection on his 37th birthday; no habit is magic, genetics and luck will always be factors., yet it's still better to shift the odds in the right direction.
I have an issue with the study due to it being funded by beyond meat. That taints the entire thing for me. I wouldn't expect a study funded by the dairy industry on whether or not cheese was good for you to show cheese as bad.
I don't think the study was funded by beyond meat, it was just that one of the researchers had some previous funding from them. I could be wrong, though
It wasn't funded by beyond meat. It was partially funded by a guy that also happened to invest in beyond meat. If beyond meat funded it you'd think they would have put beyond meat in the study which they either didn't or they didn't say they did.
Gil has covered funding before. The source of the funding isn’t necessarily a problem. You have to look under the hood to make sure they are dotting their I’s and crossing their T’s. I haven’t heard much about this argument from reputable sources online in a while so I think it is becoming a thing of the past for modern day studies because there are so many who WILL call you out for it. But time will tell.
As Dr. GIL has pointed out in the past if the data has not been selective and the study is methodologicaly rigorous then it doesn't matter who funded it. Researchers can easily spot a "gamed" study.
Don't forget the main objective of Netflix documentaries is not to inform, but to entertain and profit. Obviously, controversial topics are very lucrative, regardless of the quality of the evidence presented.
You are right and I agree with you. However, Dr. Gil also told the same during this rant. And the problem with it that there are many people who aren't into health and nutrition that much, unlike most subscribers of channels like this one. Those less interested people base their opinions on one or two popular Netflix documentaries and maybe one or two short articles in lifestyle magazines like Cosmopolitan.
I could not agree with what you said more. Especially about the part where statements are exaggerated from "the vegan side". I am shouting this from the rooftops for years now in the animal rights community. And still I am hearing claims like "xyz-animal product causes cancer, kills the plantes etc..."
I thought the idea for the experiment was really interesting and it was also good to see how people got on and follow along for the duration of the study. Having said that, this documentary I found pretty annoying at a lot of points because it just kept going way off topic with things completely unrelated to the study, episodes 2 and 3 was almost completely irrelevant. Imho it would be better to half the length and actually stay on topic
I felt the same way like he could have been done a lot quicker but it was cool having multiple stories going on at the same time. While a lot of it seemed off track it did all tie together in the end enough for me to feel good about it when it was all said and done. Hopefully you feel good about it when it was all said and done.
@@VeganLinked Honestly I think it made the whole viewing experience worse and makes the whole documentary seem more in the "Vegan propaganda" category so people may be more likely to disregard all the positive findings for a plant based diet. Maybe it's because I've seen most of this before, land of hope and glory, dominion, cowspiracy, what the health, gamechangers etc. one thing I will say though is that I found the story about the chef really interesting, especially as I really like going to vegetarian restaurants that use real vegetables as the food instead of all these meat substitutes, went to one a few days ago and the mushroom bourguignon was amazing. (Btw i have been Vegan about 7 years)
You said: "(...) this documentary I found pretty annoying at a lot of points because it just kept going way off topic with things completely unrelated to the study, episodes 2 and 3 was almost completely irrelevant." I have to respectfully disagree with this point. I strongly believe that we need to have a more holistic perspective on our food choices. People tend to choose food either from taste preference or health. But I really applaude the initiative to help people widen their understanding of how food choice impact the world. People need to be less selfish, and the only way to do this is to enlighten people about the ripple effect from certain consumer patterns. Especially since the implications of the standard Western diet are so negative.
Thanks. I'm a vegan. I very much appreciate your insistence on rigorous argument. I must often defend myself against aggressive argument by people who expect me to justify my decisions while they don't feel any responsibility to make a coherent argument to back up their "normal" choices. Top tip: do not ever utter the word "tofu"!
I am just wondering if you know if it is true that in order to grow vegetables and fruits to feed a huge population, that millions of birds need to be killed? Is it true that in order to make a fertilizer for strawberries use animals?
Truth is Mike it goes both ways trust me. I hear ya though. Some people are just so into there diet lifestyle choices that they see everyone who is not apart of it as morally bankrupt.
I would love to see the results of this study done in a controlled environment (bootcamp style, with controlled meals and workouts). I wonder if, in that case, the loss of muscle mass in the twins with the vegan diet be so significant.
Dr. Gil, Thank you for remaining committed to presenting scientific data. It can't be easy when you see almost every other well respected healthcare professional becoming a for profit ad for various wellness products. I'm sure you are aware of the $$$ involved. Please know that you have a community of followers who appreciate the fact that you remain true to presenting scientific facts with no loyalty to any product or specific diet. You are a breath of fresh air in this time of distorted information. Muito obrigada from the Algarve.
Excellent points! Especially the part about unreliable communication. Having a very high integrity about factualness is crucial for trust in the field (or person) in the long term and seems to be often forgotten when people are so eager to promote something, even with the best of intentions.
Every time I see one of your videos, at a certain point, I need to pause the video and comment: I really love the way you analize a topic. You don’t leave anything to the case and try to cover every little aspect of the whole thing. You are a true mentor to me! Filippo, young MD from Italy 🇮🇹
BRAVO Dr. Gil! If you could see me, you would see I am giving you a standing ovation. So right about "half-truths" they are dangerous and will cause people like me to not believe anything you say and turn you off. This is why I love your channel; you based your decisions/statements on science not on your personal biases. Thank you!
I'd love to hear your opinion on the Mastering Diabetes channel, and their advocacy of a whole foods plant based diet to reverse type 2 diabetes. Haven't seen anyone in your field take them up on it and as a T2 of 20 years am interested in knowing the truth.
Knowing the truth, I mean I know the truth for me because I tried it. Two weeks into going vegan I dropped my BP pills for good and I can now play sports for hours without getting blurry visioned. I've been mostly plant based with occasional seafood for almost 2 years now. Try it for a 2-3 months and see what changes it makes for you.
Any diet that creates a calorie deficit is going to bring very similar weight and health benefits. Macros make subtle differences but don't on their own cure diseases.
We can go back and forth on the soundness of each diet whether it be plant based or omnivore based but ever since the ADA ( the body that certifies nutritionists)issued the statement that a well planned vegan diet is appropriate for all stages of life from pregnancy to elderhood- I think the bigger question is why are we still strengthening these inherently violent systems when we objectively do not have to….
As always, appreciate your focus on evidence over dogma. So refreshing, and so necessary! And about your 'rant': when you rant, you are about as aggressive as some other UA-camrs when they sleep (a certain 'Professor' comes to mind) ...😂 And, lastly, audio is clearly improved. I also have a Blue Yeti, but I feel that yours sounds better than mine. Gotta play around with that some more. Cheers Mario
The problem with studies into the effect of diet and cancer is that they're all short term in relation to the the lefe cycle of cancer, most breast cancers taking 25 years from first abnormal cell to clinical presentation. I am concerned about the role of bovine mammary virus in breast cancer stimulation, - do you have any thoughts on this Dr Gil?
Well done! I love a non-biased review and your level headed conversation! A coverage of what omnivores ate..(SAD diet,junk food, ultra processed etc), vs vegan (did they eat vegan-or did they add the “fake” meat and cheese and ultra processed vegan “food”?) would be interesting. Fascinating subject..I was vegan (stopped 3 years ago) for almost 30 years and find this sudden flood of documentary-type shows intriguing. I look forward to more on this subject! Thank you for your steady hand in dissecting the details we all need to see. The wizard of oz, was after all, just a man behind a curtain.
I believe Gary Fraser (on the proof with Simon Hill) found dairy milk increased risk of breast cancer, and may have suggested that it might be bovine hormones in dairy milk that increased risk of prostate and breast cancer, such that yogurt and cheese might not have same effect as hormones are lowered during the process of making yogurt and cheese.
Another possibility is that fermented milk products like cheese and yogurt contain probiotics and/or postbiotics, both of which provide health benefits that outweigh any potential downside of consuming milk products.
Regarding colorectal cancer risk, it is lower with dairy consumption, as you mentioned, likely driven by protective effect of calcium. With respect to breast cancer risk, the evidence is mixed. Some studies show increased risk and some show decreased risk. That seems to be related to the type of dairy, with fermented dairy lowering the risk (ER-/PR- breast cancer risk) while non-fermented dairy increasing the risk (ER+PR+ breast cancer risk)as per a 2020 Clinical Nutrition paper by Joana Kaluza et. al. The positive effect of fermented dairy seems to be related to presence of probiotics bacteria. For women though, there seems to an increased risk of ovarian cancer with dairy consumption.
@@dragan176 It doesn't tell you the diet is more satiating. At most it tells you they were full (that's not the same as satiated) on fewer calories because the overal composition of the diet they were instructed to eat had a lower calorie density. A study that pitted vegan diet against omnivore diet, that was covered by this channel not so long ago, mentioned that whilst the participants eating the vegan diet ate fewer calories even when they were eating ad libitum, they also reported being less satiated overal. One of the explanations was that they were eating more low calorie density foods. That's how you get more overal weight lost, fewer calories ingested ad libitum, and more reports of being full but not satiated after meals. Fullness is just a pressure sense resulting from the volume of food goes into the stomach. Satiety is the result of hormonal signals (ghrelin and leptin). The vegan diets in the study were more filling because the volume of food was higher, but they were reported as less satiating. Some people do not personally feel a difference between fullness and being satiated, but this doesn't seem to be the norm. This doesn't mean a vegan diet can't be satiating. But if someone reports not being satiated whilst being full they should reconsider the proportion of low calorie density foods in their diet, as well as re-assess their intake of protein and dietary fat.
You are the ONLY Doctor I subscribe to on UA-cam. Every other doctor I've come across is a paid shill with a vested interest to promote a certain product or a particular kind of diet. You are the ONLY genuine doctor I've found on here. Please DON'T CHANGE and I cannot thank you enough for what you do here!! All my best wishes for you Doc!!
Every single time I see auch studies, I think of my grandmas and grandpas who lived until very old age. They were omnivores, all of them, but they produced the food they ate, very seasonal, mostly plantbased during summer, spring and beginning of autumn, mostly animal based in winter. They moved a lot a s worked a lot. Longevity imho is a combination of factors, not only diet. Vegan or omnivore, to each their own, I don't think anything excessive is good for us. Moderation, movement, stimulating your mind, human connection. I think these are the most important things. Nice video though, you keep me curious :)
Kind of, sometimes/to some degree. A diet does have an effect on the amount of calories consumed (so caloric restriction or overeating or binge eating), it's not something independent of the diet that you do. You don't apply force of sheer will or something, you don't only and completely CHOOSE how much calories you eat. No, the calories consumed are controlled by the content of your diet (some foods more filling than others, some modulate your hormones to feel hungry all the time thus making you more likely to eat more , some are small and calorie dense and can't fill you up easily unless you eat big quantities which means you go overboard on your calories, etc. etc.) and various other factors.
It's also nice to have a way of eating that doesn't involve hurting others like abusing animals, creating violent jobs, being toxic is running communities, creating zoonotic diseases, deforestation, desertification, dead zones, chronic reviews, chronic reviews, chronic diseases, etc.
@@mitkoogrozevI think it's about forming good habits, and "dieting" is a bad habit. Work out a nutrition plan that works for you, then when you are active, you will drop some bodyfat, being over-active can be a bad habit too, as can underactive. Fuelling fat loss is important. Won't be any quick results
I could be in a caloric restriction eating chips, snack pies and soda, but that would be a piss poor diet. The quality of the calories matter, and it's difficult to overeat on quality calories/foods.
I agree. The show actually did a disservice to the Stanford study, by providing fuel for those who want to discredit the study due to illegitimate reasons.
If calories weren't equated then you remove the most important variable immediately. Many many health benefits are seen based on lower calorie diets when weight loss occurs regardless of what is eaten, there's a plethora of studies showing this. Weight loss is usually the initial driver of improved health, you're markers improve. (like the Twinkie diet experiment). Correlation vs causation If they equated calories and the Vegan diet still comes out on top, then you can deduce that a Vegan diet is likely better
The lower calories were when they chose what to eat though. The vast majority of vegans eat less calories than omnivores on average because vegan foods tend to be lower calorically dense and higher fibre so you feel full with less calories. It's hard to control for this variable when people are able to choose their own food. Almost impossible.
Even that would not be enough. It would also have to be the same protein amount for example. Also a huge problem is the fact that your previous diet influences the results. If you previously always eat a certain way, for example lots of cheese, then you will not lack nutrients that are high in cheese, but lack nutrients in foods you consume less of. A change to the vegan group will provide you in short terms with a greater food divercity and with the currently lacking nutrients. But following this diet long term might lead to other nutrient deficiencies, so you will benefit by going back to cheese and vice versa. The short duration of the experiment is just a huge problem to predict long term results.
Gardner's experiments are usually to see how real people handle a diet in the real world. Forcing the calories equal would be the complete opposite of the aim of the experiment and would make the experiment less relevant to real world application.
If you follow two diets without counting calories and one diet gets you to SPONTANEOUSLY reduce your calories that's an important experimental result. You wouldn't find that information if you forced calorie to be the same.
I study health and nutrition a lot. I’m a huge proponent of regenerative agriculture including farm animals, of eating primarily plants and fungi, and restricting ultraprocessed foods in favor of whole food. While I thought it was educational seeing the disgusting state of the factory farms, and I think it’s awesome to grow mushrooms instead of that, the entire series was slanted. This is just the sort of show my meat-eating friends will use as another example of bad science and propaganda, and they will be right. All the photos of meat were hamburgers or hot dogs. There is much evidence to suggest that dairy yogurt and cheese are actually healthy. The data revealed at the end weren’t even corroborating the statements made throughout the series.
@@kitefan1😂 Sadly, those chiropractors do not limit their spread of misinformation to just nutrition, many of them also talk about disease management like they were actually MD 🤦🏽♂️
Great breakdown of the show. However, you’ve had Chris Gardner on your channel a bunch, I was honestly a bit surprised that there’s as much criticism of it in lieu of that.
After watching the first episode it became clear that this is a clear example of propaganda. Vegan propaganda. We were interested in the human story so we forwarded through the filler fluff which we knew already from Netflix ‘What the Health. Disappointing that they couldn’t just stay with the twins.
How is dairy beneficial for breast cancer? I’ve only ever heard of numerous studies on the risks, including the whole issue of Bovine Leukaemia virus, being present in biopsies of over 50% of breast cancers.
present in over 60% of patients diagnosed with breast cancer. Soy milk has been shown to be protective from breast cancer but the misinformers will try to convince it mimics estrogen and is therefore unhealthy, all the while steering people back to dairy. Unbelievable, just absolutely unbelievable.
I hope people can look at the Stanford twin study, and understand the makers of this documentary are adding their narrative on top. That should be taken with a large grain of salt, but shouldn’t take away from the actual study.
So sad to see all that money and time and energy being invested in a documentary/series that yet again lacks accuracy, honesty, integrity, objectivity, nuance, science, and further pushes emotions, ideology and confusion. Can't wait for all the folks like you picking the claims apart and settling some of the confusion. Thanks!
Well, this is surprising to me: a good friend of mine who is a gastro-enterologists who is specialised in nutrition says that while indeed there is a negative correlation between dairy intake and bowel-cancers, the is a higher risk of breast cancer for people who consume more dairy. I'm not a doctor, so I wouldn't know where to look, but this does confuse me a bit. Two doctors that I tend to trust giving an opposite answer on the breast cancer topic.
Gil, could you make a video about nutrients such as trace elements and minerals? Here in Germany for example there seems to be an endemic iodine deficiency and vegans or those who follow an almost strict PBD may run into iodine deficency. Seems that only B12 gets mentioned mostly.
You have to buy iodized salt. 1g of iodized salt covers roughtly 13%, so you would need 8-9g of salt (6g is recommended). Thus, too much salt to dependent upon. This fortification has probably been done for omnivore diets, as their diet contains some iodine from animal products already, so iodized salt would round up their diets. @@pomberry3591
@@trevorpatterson8712Yeah I know. Could try it in the future my main focus was just to hit iodine. So I bought VEG1 yesterday which contains iodine and is a bit more cost-effective than just seaweed I guess?
What would you say if they find people who eat diet 1 (e.g., standard american diet) tend to eat more calories each day than people who eat diet 2, so they have higher bmi's and other measures (e.g., cholesterol, viseral fat, etc.)? How should the researchers deal with that issue when comparing diets?
I don't think they took pictures of their genitals. Rather, I believe that used thermal imaging (wavelengths outside human visual range). They did appear to create thermal images, which appeared to be blurred in the show.
Snow day at work so I finally get to make the first comment ;-) Edit: Re unreliable information rant, the lack of reliable sources of information for people who don't have time, energy, or skill to do literature reviews on any topic that they want to learn about, is why channels like this are so valuable. I am capable of doing fairly solid research into what the current state of knowledge on a given topic is (I have a Ph.D. in an unrelated field), but I am not going to make a full-time job of studying nutrition. For me personally, if I catch a few problems, that don't get corrected in an appropriate way, I stop watching the content. Dr. Greger (you showed his picture) is a good example. I watched some of his videos a few years ago, because I like to hear good news about things I already support, but he is more of a salesman than a purveyor of reliable information, which, as you point out, makes him a bad salesman. I would rather get solid information.
Honestly, is there a better, more actually unbiased nutrition source like this not just on YT but anywhere online? This channel is a treasure trove of insights and honest dissection of research, unironically.
He is totally correct about people seeing bad data and losing credibility on the rest of the work because I was into this show until I heard a couple questionable segments and could just not convince myself to finish watching. I’m interested to see the results, but not bad enough to overlook the bias perspective of the show.
As someone who was vegetarian for 25 years, and who was addicted to Mac n cheese and pizza, but who has been vegan for over two years now, I do believe casomorphines are addictive. I feel much better now and my health has improved. Giving up dairy is definitely a renunciation, not unlike giving up other addictions.
lmao as someone who has suffered from extreme addictions its actually disrespectful that you say this. To compare dairy to drug and other addictions is crazy especially when the evidence says that they are not addictive in humans. Keep living your life the way you want but just know your probably experiencing placebo
I felt like this could have been two completely separate shows. I was super interested in the experiment but when it started shifting towards vegan propaganda, I lost interest pretty quickly - I’m very interested in going plant based but just don’t like some of the dishonesty around it.
France aren't healthy? You been recently? Full of obesity and illness. But, that's probably from all the fast food and bread rather than good meat and cheese.
What are you talking about? thousands of peoples are still dying from the first cause of human death, vascular problem mainly from eating too much meat, dairy, and eggs full of salt, oxydized cholesterol and saturated fat.
Thank you for this review. I even think the producers of the series would mostly agree with you. I am vegan for one reason only and it is not diet. It is that I do not want to participate, as much as is possible to, in the harm and torture of sentient beings. Even if a plant based diet was not the most healthy, I would remain vegan. This is just my world view and not virtue signalling. I do however believe we also need to pay attention to our health for the sake of our families and society as a whole. We need honest science based studies and information, I thank you for your work in this regard.
I did found the documentary to be interesting and well-intentioned, however some of that was overshadowed by the heavy bias. I think both arguments can be true but the presentation needs to be 100% objective.
Thank you! I felt the same way watching this series. I’m a self-advocate of eating ‘mostly plants’ but my inner-skeptic was blinking “cherry-picked” and “anecdotal” throughout much of this ‘documentary.’ I think its editorial feel did a disservice to plant-based diets by adding to the ‘noise’.
I'd like to see more follow-up on the Adventist study that seemed to indicate that mostly plant based with a little animal protein had a slightly better results than 100% plant. I don't like how we are pushed to join to join a 100% tribe on either side.
I hate that too. Not everything from the one side is good and all from the other side is bad. It's just an imaginary and unnecessairy line drawn which has nothing to do with a perfect diet considering health. Not every plant in every amount is good and healthy just because it's a plant, and the same is true for meat and dairy. There are good and bad sides for every single food. Why would you want to exclude something just because it's part of a virtual group? It's the moderation and variety combined with your specific nutrient requirements and specific intolerances that makes a good diet. If you're overweight a lower caloric diet is the way to go - vegan is one option there. If you are extremly slim and recovering from a surgery your body has huge needs for calories and protein, so the better amino acid profile of animal protein and higher caloric density of cheese might help your body to recover faster.
The problem with studies like this is they compare the plant based diets with "everyone else", which of course includes the vast majority who eat the standard American crap diet. Of course they are going to look better.
Indeed. When I finally started reading further than just the highlighted bits in the studies dr Greger showed on his channel, I realised that quite often the further information contradicted what he said. I lost complete faith with in him and stopped following him. Then I also started questioning the claims of other vegan doctors and found some of them to be economical with their information too. Then I found that some of the low carb doctors also cherry pick their information. Before I lost complete faith in humanity though, I luckily found this channel, which is now my favourite and go to channel for nutritional information. Thanks Gil.
I’m not vegan. I have stopped eating all sugars, I’m at 20 net carbs per day, I eat eggs, almond malk, chicken, turkey, fish, string beans and cheese. Dx T2D 8/2022 at 12.5 A1c. Now at 5.4. Lost 60 pounds. No processed foods or alcohol. It’s important to find what’s right for you.
Very interesting setup using twins, but vegan vs omni is too wishywashy to tell much of anything.. except something on the vegan side. Sadly the show started pushing the vegan agenda almost immediately which showed they were gunning for their biased result so I lost interest in the show mid first episode. Already tons of biased vegan shows / "scientists" out there. Hopefully some day we get similar setup with a real scientist with better setup and a real interest to gather some new usable data which is really useful.
I was 495lbs. I had NAFLD diagnosed by my doctor both with blood work and using an ultrasound. I kept eating what my doctor told me, I exercised and I kept getting fatter and fatter and more metabolically unhealthy. I was on the list to have gastric bypass surgery but because I was so high risk I was told I needed to lose 80lbs in order to have the surgery safely because I was a walking heart attack. Imagine that, being told to lose weight to have surgery to help me lose weight. Anyway, that is when I turned to High Fat Keto and it changed my life. I didn't even count the calories. I ate until I felt full but kept my carbs to 20gr a day and ate unprocessed foods. The weight fell off like magic. I combined this with intermittent fasting with a 6 hour eating window and I completely reversed my Type-2 Diabetes, Insulin resistance, high cholesterol, high triglycerides and I'm no longer obese 7 years later. All with just changing what I ate. No surgery, I came off all my medications. I now do OMAD instead of the 6 hour eating window and I feel amazing. I'm so thankful because as luck would have it I slipped and fell and ended up with a spinal cord injury which left me mostly paralyzed from the waist down and due to my chronic pain from the injury I'm very sedentary and can't do much in terms of exercise but I have been able to manage my weight quite successfully with my Ketogenic ultra-low carb diet. So that there should stand as an example that we are what we eat and while exercise has many benefits for health and I'm not denying that, you CAN be metabolically healthy without it through diet alone because I am proof of that!
Maybe the mention of dairy being associated with higher prostate cancer risk and the omission of dairy being associated with lower colorectal cancer and breast cancer risk is due to the fact that in the case of prostate cancer risk the association is very strong (and there's little you can do to mitigate it if you are consuming dairy), while the association with lower breast cancer risk is very controversial, with many studies showing no significant association and some suggesting higher risk (it probably depends on what you substitute dairy for. If you are substituting dairy for meat, it may be protective, but if you study a vegetarian population, milk is associated with increased risk - see the Adventist Health Study-2, for example), and in case of colorectal cancer risk, the association is mainly thought to be explained by calcium intake, which you can easily get from other foods. As you said in the video: it is a docuseries. They don't have the time to go over all the details, and it would be a disservice to present the "mixed" evidence as if the evidence pointing to positive health benefits is as strong and significant as the evidence pointing to negative health benefits. It would just get people confused, which is exactly what the industry wants. Remember the motto of the tobacco industry: "doubt is our product".
I mean- you have to admit it was biased. No one should shame ANYONE about what they eat. Vegan, or if they have animal products. Different people have different needs. And I hope you all take that into consideration.
I totally agree with you! They talk all about the harmful ways that meat is made, but they say nothing about how harmful all these highly-processed vegan products can be. It seemed more like an advertising campaign for certain brands than an actual unbiased documentary. I don't know how Tim Spector agreed to appear in this show, he is all about avoiding highly processed foods, vegan or otherwise, so I doubt he endorses any of these products promoted there. I found the documentary really disappointing.
Great point about unreliable communication. Something I feel strongly about, as well.
One of the biggest challenges over the years has been how to point out inaccuracies without antagonizing people so there's dialogue and collective improvement rather than "diet wars". A learning process...
Great review and I agree 100% that selectively presenting evidence is sure to backfire and only harms the credibility of whatever case you're trying to make.
The advocates of the "EAT THIS WAY OR ELSE" type of diets too often "cherry-pick" data that supports their views while ignoring that which contradicts or is ambiguous. I appreciate your candor and objectivity. I trust science because of those qualities, it's the most reliable vehicle we have to unveil the truth.
Dr. Gil is one of the few sane people on here, in my opinion. About half of the doctors on here, have no business giving advice about nutrition to anybody. It's like all they care about is getting more clicks. For example, who but a nutcase would suggest eating a carnivore diet is healthy? Also, people suggesting that diabetes is a condition that's mainly about eating too many carbs, and so the best treatment there is, is eating less of them, is offering overly simplistic advice. It's never a good idea to make important health decisions based on the advice of a stranger on UA-cam, and not seeing a medical specialist. Dr. Nicola Guess is a far better resource, to me. My protein target as an athlete, is high enough that it's hard for me to get enough without protein powders if I don't eat animal products. I have added more nuts and beans over the years and am currently at about 50/50.
So true, the big issue these days is you have to check the study reports and protocols for yourself, money influence so much of what is called "science" today
I think it's fair to say the producers of the series were hoping to portray plant-based diets in a very positive light and they did not hide the muscle loss in the vegan group. They deserve respect for that.
Been there. done that. Vegan, vegetarian, Paleo, Keto, etc etc etc. In the end I am healthier on a diet of variety and eating food that is the least adulterated with chemicals and processing as possible. I culture and ferment, cook from scratch as much as I can, choose brands carefully by research and simply reading labels. I am 75 and “oddly” in spite of having Sjögren’s from 8 years of stressful caregiving for my Alzheimer’s mother, I am amazingly healthy physically and mentally. I also liberally use alternative medicine when the research supports it and don’t bow to pharmaceutical bullying by doctors but do extensive research to get to the real facts. So far, this approach is working well for me. Also mental and emotional health can’t be underestimated. So my motto is Live, Love, Laugh and always be kind.
Excellent!!! Thanks so much for this nuanced, honest review of the Netflix series. I have been happily vegan/plant-based for over 10 years now, but even I, after all these years find myself "put off" by unsubstantiated claims made by so many of the well respected and well meaning leaders in the movement. I've had to come to my own conclusions, digging for valid info in the literature as a non-scientist. I am so glad to have come across you and Chris MacAskill at Plant Chompers!!! ❤
Totally agree! I am also happily plant based (starting my 6th year) and I also find it hard to find reliable evidence-based sources of information. I first started with How not to Die and the Nutrition Facts, but I later realized this is not a un biased source🙈 I am also much more nuanced in my stance towards health benefits of plant-based eating and I am no longer pushing this lifestyle as the holy grail. Also share your appreciation of this channel and the Plant Chompers!❤
Indeed I like this channel and plant choppers as well. But when the book of dr Greger came out you see that they did an interview : from the format you see that there are both (Chris and his wife) big fans. Thus this was not an objective evaluation like in the other videos. It’s my perception and it’s maybe not true but when I read the book « how not to age », it’s the same direction during 600 pages : plants are good and animal products are bad.
If you are vegan it reinforces your beliefs. If you are not (my case), you have a feeling like : ok it’s surely better to eat plants (and I was impressed by the power of plants) but there must be some positive things somewhere about eating chicken or eggs or fish ? And as it’s never mentioned, you wonder if there is no cherry picking.
I solved this issue by telling myself that the aim was to eat more plant based even if I still ate animal products. And I will try to replace the easy things eg bake cakes without eggs, make creamy dishes with cashews or silken tofu, learn to cook something with tofu and tempeh that my kids accept to eat ….
My thoughts exactly! Best wishes.
Body integrity results are what matter.
Plant chompers excellent
An informative and interesting review of the Netflix series. One of the things that really struck me when I watched it was the insistence that both the vegan and omnivorous diets were healthy, yet the vegan arm were provided with ultraprocessed food (fake sausages, cheese etc) which are known to be bad for health. This seems most bizarre.
Indeed, good remark. Most of the vegan alternatives that look like meat are UP foods that need to be avoided.
How are they "known" to be bad for health? I'm not doubting you, I just haven't come across this. I love my vegan sausages, eat them 5-6 times a week. LDL is still dropping. Anecdotal, I know.
@@amybethhurst You people just know NO LIMITS.
I didn't notice this, but it's a good point. I myself am clearing as much UPF as possible, out of my diet atm. Vegan four years and I started off eating lots of whole foods and lost 30lbs. As I have added processed foods, like sausages, burgers and cheese back into my diet, the weight has started going back up. So, it's back to the potatoes and veggies for me. 😅
@@amybethhurst They are processed, that's how.
I couldn't even begin to bother with a show like this. First of all, the vegan diet doesn't tell us what someone is eating; it only tells us what they don't eat. The same is true of the omnivore diet. Either one could be a relatively healthy or unhealthy diet depending on what the people on each diet are eating.
The study showed how each diet was designed and what they consisted of. Both are considered to be quite healthy, centered around whole plants, basically diferentiated by whether they contained some meat or not. The study is quite interesting (I haven't watched the documentary). The channel Plant Chompers just released a great video about it, interviewing the scientists behind it. I highly recommend you check it out! Here: ua-cam.com/video/t24BCuXIlZI/v-deo.htmlsi=zcqUaYGyuuGEbAjE
These are the secrets to living more than 116 years from spanish María Branyas, the oldest person in the world:
1. Eat without getting completely full. Eat small amounts of food. This habit consists of eating only what we need, without overdoing it. There is no deprivation of any food, but you do consume those that are less healthy on rare occasions.
2. María eats yogurt every day, but natural, nothing sugary.
3. Stress management. A quiet life. María indicates the need to get closer to people who give us good energy and positivity, and stay away from those who bring the opposite.
4. María has not had any major illness in her 116 years, and she overcame Covid-19 without major consequences.
They aren’t secrets, you are suggesting correlations are causations. As regular viewers of this channel know, outliers and anecdotal evidence is meagre at best. We also don’t know how old she would have been if she didn’t eat yogurt or eat until stuffed as that’s different for everyone. Let’s stick to the science here.
Well said! You have a great way of communicating complex scientific problems to the masses without over-complicating it. Another great quality of yours is you aren't egotistical in relaying your message. Other people seem to want to make themselves sound smarter, rather than relay/explain a point. Thank you!
I started watching the show and was immediately disappointed by how persuasive it was. I didn't finish watching it.
I've eaten an omnivore diet for the first 17 years of my life and then switched to a vegan diet. I'm now 54. I can honestly say there's room for improvement in both ways of eating. I had issues when I ate meat and in the first ten years as a vegan. Eating whole foods and drinking filtered water is best while also making sure you're getting adequate omega 3. Stay away from sugar and processed carbs. Also, I've found that eating plenty of fermented foods will keep you regular, more so than increasing your fiber intake. Lastly, exercise is also important. Lots of walking and either free weights or machine work is necessary to maintain your form. That's about it.
I am vegan and I agree with everything that you said in your rant. I want to know the actual facts, and it's so hard these days with each side spouting their propaganda, and then having those narratives parroted online.. There are numerous legit reasons to go vegan, we don't need to be spreading misinformation or half truths.
As a vegan, I also agree. However it seems that propaganda works, so I say fight fire with fire if that's what it takes. I think unbiased high quality work will never make it to the mainstream, especially in a tv format. This hopefully brings exposure for others to do some digging and reflect on their choices.
What is your opinion on veganism bringing more profit to companies?
What legit reasons?
@@alexkwak7146 Climate friendliness for once (especially if you cut out lamb and beef), also if you have a tendency to eat junk food, people may tend to eat less because of limited choice :)
That's among others for sure, just the ones that matter to me.
@@alexkwak7146if we are talking from a health based point of view, there's an amplitude of studies that show alot of benefits if one follows a diet that's whole food and plant based. From lowering cholesterol levels, to overall artery health, to better gut microbiome due to the diversity of veggies consumed etc. Ofc I can't mention everything, but this channel has a lot of videos that study different meta-analysies that have come out surrounding nutrition, so I'd say maybe take a look!
Ofc, veganism isn't only about your dietary choices. Veganism is the effort to try to minimize animal suffering and exploitation. Therefore, it's to not pay for animal products in food or clothes or cosmetics, and to actively try to help animals in any way you practically can. It's all about the effort to live a life where animals suffer less because of your choices! So, if you want to get a better understanding of veganism, I would suggest the channel Earthling Ed, he's a very eloquent fellow that would explain such a consent better than I ever would! Hope this helps!
I have been one of the people who complained about you "attaking" the "good guys". I see now that you're right. Thanks for that.
I think that it’s very nice of you of posting that comment. Because it’s rare for people to reflect on their past actions and saying that they could have done something else. 👍
@@virginiemazy7054 thanks☺
@@virginiemazy7054Agree!
@@virginiemazy7054 Here's a thought Wouldn't it be wonderful if people reflect before they react
I was impressed that the results were not overwhelming a vegan win, but they still went through with it. Obviously better numbers for vegans, but the real benefits are cumulative over a lifetime. That can't be captured in the format of a Netflix show.
What has dieting got to do with slim fit young'uns?
... including an elevated risk of degenerative diseases over those long periods. The picture is never just all roses or all thorns. That's why truthful and comprehensive details are so important in health sciences / nutrition.
It's not about veganism really, it's about emphasizing whole plants as the centerpiece of one's diet. That said, one can eat the healthiest variety of foods for all his life and still succumb to a banal infection on his 37th birthday; no habit is magic, genetics and luck will always be factors., yet it's still better to shift the odds in the right direction.
Just not true. When you get to wake up everyday and take a massive dump.. satisfying..
Meat gets you backed up and constipated..
It was also only done over a short period of time
They weren’t even assigned randomly- they were given their less preferred diet choice.
One of the very rare gems on UA-cam that try to be scientific and objective at all cost, when most all others are unscientific and subjective.
Don't apologize! I love your "rant" and am completely on board with you!
I have an issue with the study due to it being funded by beyond meat. That taints the entire thing for me. I wouldn't expect a study funded by the dairy industry on whether or not cheese was good for you to show cheese as bad.
I don't think the study was funded by beyond meat, it was just that one of the researchers had some previous funding from them. I could be wrong, though
It wasn't funded by beyond meat. It was partially funded by a guy that also happened to invest in beyond meat. If beyond meat funded it you'd think they would have put beyond meat in the study which they either didn't or they didn't say they did.
Gil has covered funding before. The source of the funding isn’t necessarily a problem. You have to look under the hood to make sure they are dotting their I’s and crossing their T’s. I haven’t heard much about this argument from reputable sources online in a while so I think it is becoming a thing of the past for modern day studies because there are so many who WILL call you out for it. But time will tell.
As Dr. GIL has pointed out in the past if the data has not been selective and the study is methodologicaly rigorous then it doesn't matter who funded it. Researchers can easily spot a "gamed" study.
It wasn’t funded by beyond meat…
Don't forget the main objective of Netflix documentaries is not to inform, but to entertain and profit. Obviously, controversial topics are very lucrative, regardless of the quality of the evidence presented.
You are right and I agree with you. However, Dr. Gil also told the same during this rant.
And the problem with it that there are many people who aren't into health and nutrition that much, unlike most subscribers of channels like this one. Those less interested people base their opinions on one or two popular Netflix documentaries and maybe one or two short articles in lifestyle magazines like Cosmopolitan.
I could not agree with what you said more. Especially about the part where statements are exaggerated from "the vegan side". I am shouting this from the rooftops for years now in the animal rights community. And still I am hearing claims like "xyz-animal product causes cancer, kills the plantes etc..."
The weight loss was so small (−1.9 [0.7] kg; 95% CI, −3.3 to −0.6 kg), it's unlikely this caused the drop in LDL and the lengthening of the telomeres.
I thought the idea for the experiment was really interesting and it was also good to see how people got on and follow along for the duration of the study. Having said that, this documentary I found pretty annoying at a lot of points because it just kept going way off topic with things completely unrelated to the study, episodes 2 and 3 was almost completely irrelevant.
Imho it would be better to half the length and actually stay on topic
It was all about virtue signalling rather than an experiment that's why. Just like many other documentaries on netflix. It was nonsense.
It’s called filler and modern documentaries seem to have a lot of it
I felt the same way like he could have been done a lot quicker but it was cool having multiple stories going on at the same time. While a lot of it seemed off track it did all tie together in the end enough for me to feel good about it when it was all said and done. Hopefully you feel good about it when it was all said and done.
@@VeganLinked Honestly I think it made the whole viewing experience worse and makes the whole documentary seem more in the "Vegan propaganda" category so people may be more likely to disregard all the positive findings for a plant based diet.
Maybe it's because I've seen most of this before, land of hope and glory, dominion, cowspiracy, what the health, gamechangers etc. one thing I will say though is that I found the story about the chef really interesting, especially as I really like going to vegetarian restaurants that use real vegetables as the food instead of all these meat substitutes, went to one a few days ago and the mushroom bourguignon was amazing. (Btw i have been Vegan about 7 years)
You said: "(...) this documentary I found pretty annoying at a lot of points because it just kept going way off topic with things completely unrelated to the study, episodes 2 and 3 was almost completely irrelevant."
I have to respectfully disagree with this point.
I strongly believe that we need to have a more holistic perspective on our food choices. People tend to choose food either from taste preference or health. But I really applaude the initiative to help people widen their understanding of how food choice impact the world. People need to be less selfish, and the only way to do this is to enlighten people about the ripple effect from certain consumer patterns. Especially since the implications of the standard Western diet are so negative.
Thanks. I'm a vegan. I very much appreciate your insistence on rigorous argument. I must often defend myself against aggressive argument by people who expect me to justify my decisions while they don't feel any responsibility to make a coherent argument to back up their "normal" choices. Top tip: do not ever utter the word "tofu"!
Just say "The T word!' lol
I'm not vegan but tofu is awesome, it's sad that a traditional Asian staple food is only seen by Westerners as "vegan chicken" or whatever.
I am just wondering if you know if it is true that in order to grow vegetables and fruits to feed a huge population, that millions of birds need to be killed? Is it true that in order to make a fertilizer for strawberries use animals?
Truth is Mike it goes both ways trust me. I hear ya though. Some people are just so into there diet lifestyle choices that they see everyone who is not apart of it as morally bankrupt.
It goes both ways. Aggressiveness arises from both sides.
I would love to see the results of this study done in a controlled environment (bootcamp style, with controlled meals and workouts). I wonder if, in that case, the loss of muscle mass in the twins with the vegan diet be so significant.
Dr. Gil, Thank you for remaining committed to presenting scientific data. It can't be easy when you see almost every other well respected healthcare professional becoming a for profit ad for various wellness products. I'm sure you are aware of the $$$ involved. Please know that you have a community of followers who appreciate the fact that you remain true to presenting scientific facts with no loyalty to any product or specific diet. You are a breath of fresh air in this time of distorted information. Muito obrigada from the Algarve.
Credit to the producers for not hiding the muscle loss in the vegan groups.
I love the channel man, you are amazing. Keep up the great work doc!
Excellent points! Especially the part about unreliable communication. Having a very high integrity about factualness is crucial for trust in the field (or person) in the long term and seems to be often forgotten when people are so eager to promote something, even with the best of intentions.
Every time I see one of your videos, at a certain point, I need to pause the video and comment: I really love the way you analize a topic. You don’t leave anything to the case and try to cover every little aspect of the whole thing.
You are a true mentor to me!
Filippo, young MD from Italy 🇮🇹
BRAVO Dr. Gil! If you could see me, you would see I am giving you a standing ovation. So right about "half-truths" they are dangerous and will cause people like me to not believe anything you say and turn you off. This is why I love your channel; you based your decisions/statements on science not on your personal biases. Thank you!
The problem with only-science-based decisions is that one can harm a lot. I think that first comes philosophy and morals and then science
I literally couldn’t wait for u to make video after seeing the documentary myself on Netflix :D I m so glad u did this vid.
I'd love to hear your opinion on the Mastering Diabetes channel, and their advocacy of a whole foods plant based diet to reverse type 2 diabetes. Haven't seen anyone in your field take them up on it and as a T2 of 20 years am interested in knowing the truth.
Knowing the truth, I mean I know the truth for me because I tried it. Two weeks into going vegan I dropped my BP pills for good and I can now play sports for hours without getting blurry visioned. I've been mostly plant based with occasional seafood for almost 2 years now.
Try it for a 2-3 months and see what changes it makes for you.
Any diet that creates a calorie deficit is going to bring very similar weight and health benefits. Macros make subtle differences but don't on their own cure diseases.
My favourite (unbiased) nutrition channel!
We can go back and forth on the soundness of each diet whether it be plant based or omnivore based but ever since the ADA ( the body that certifies nutritionists)issued the statement that a well planned vegan diet is appropriate for all stages of life from pregnancy to elderhood- I think the bigger question is why are we still strengthening these inherently violent systems when we objectively do not have to….
As always, appreciate your focus on evidence over dogma. So refreshing, and so necessary!
And about your 'rant': when you rant, you are about as aggressive as some other UA-camrs when they sleep (a certain 'Professor' comes to mind) ...😂
And, lastly, audio is clearly improved. I also have a Blue Yeti, but I feel that yours sounds better than mine. Gotta play around with that some more.
Cheers
Mario
Totally agree with your belief in honest and complete information.
The problem with studies into the effect of diet and cancer is that they're all short term in relation to the the lefe cycle of cancer, most breast cancers taking 25 years from first abnormal cell to clinical presentation. I am concerned about the role of bovine mammary virus in breast cancer stimulation, - do you have any thoughts on this Dr Gil?
Well done! I love a non-biased review and your level headed conversation!
A coverage of what omnivores ate..(SAD diet,junk food, ultra processed etc), vs vegan (did they eat vegan-or did they add the “fake” meat and cheese and ultra processed vegan “food”?) would be interesting.
Fascinating subject..I was vegan (stopped 3 years ago) for almost 30 years and find this sudden flood of documentary-type shows intriguing. I look forward to more on this subject!
Thank you for your steady hand in dissecting the details we all need to see. The wizard of oz, was after all, just a man behind a curtain.
I totally agree that facts and evidence is important...otherwise, it turns ppl away. Thanks for your constant vigilance 🙂
I believe Gary Fraser (on the proof with Simon Hill) found dairy milk increased risk of breast cancer, and may have suggested that it might be bovine hormones in dairy milk that increased risk of prostate and breast cancer, such that yogurt and cheese might not have same effect as hormones are lowered during the process of making yogurt and cheese.
Another possibility is that fermented milk products like cheese and yogurt contain probiotics and/or postbiotics, both of which provide health benefits that outweigh any potential downside of consuming milk products.
Regarding colorectal cancer risk, it is lower with dairy consumption, as you mentioned, likely driven by protective effect of calcium. With respect to breast cancer risk, the evidence is mixed. Some studies show increased risk and some show decreased risk. That seems to be related to the type of dairy, with fermented dairy lowering the risk (ER-/PR- breast cancer risk) while non-fermented dairy increasing the risk (ER+PR+ breast cancer risk)as per a 2020 Clinical Nutrition paper by Joana Kaluza et. al. The positive effect of fermented dairy seems to be related to presence of probiotics bacteria. For women though, there seems to an increased risk of ovarian cancer with dairy consumption.
I think that this comment should be top.
Great! You being honest and critical about the show is great. Some health influencers are just not honest and I definitely see that as a big red flag!
If I recall correctly, the diets were not isocaloric, right?
They were, but vegans tended to eat less calories when they had to choose for themselves. That should tell you then vegan diet is more satiating
Yes. The subjects could eat as much or little as they desired.
Yes but in my opinion, thats a more accurate picture of how people would eat
@@dragan176 you mean: No, they were not isocaloric xD
@@dragan176 It doesn't tell you the diet is more satiating. At most it tells you they were full (that's not the same as satiated) on fewer calories because the overal composition of the diet they were instructed to eat had a lower calorie density. A study that pitted vegan diet against omnivore diet, that was covered by this channel not so long ago, mentioned that whilst the participants eating the vegan diet ate fewer calories even when they were eating ad libitum, they also reported being less satiated overal. One of the explanations was that they were eating more low calorie density foods. That's how you get more overal weight lost, fewer calories ingested ad libitum, and more reports of being full but not satiated after meals.
Fullness is just a pressure sense resulting from the volume of food goes into the stomach. Satiety is the result of hormonal signals (ghrelin and leptin).
The vegan diets in the study were more filling because the volume of food was higher, but they were reported as less satiating.
Some people do not personally feel a difference between fullness and being satiated, but this doesn't seem to be the norm.
This doesn't mean a vegan diet can't be satiating. But if someone reports not being satiated whilst being full they should reconsider the proportion of low calorie density foods in their diet, as well as re-assess their intake of protein and dietary fat.
You are the ONLY Doctor I subscribe to on UA-cam. Every other doctor I've come across is a paid shill with a vested interest to promote a certain product or a particular kind of diet. You are the ONLY genuine doctor I've found on here. Please DON'T CHANGE and I cannot thank you enough for what you do here!! All my best wishes for you Doc!!
You should check out medlife crisis then, he is the other genuine doctor.
Doctor Mike
Thank you for non sensational reporting. Great channel!
Every single time I see auch studies, I think of my grandmas and grandpas who lived until very old age. They were omnivores, all of them, but they produced the food they ate, very seasonal, mostly plantbased during summer, spring and beginning of autumn, mostly animal based in winter. They moved a lot a s worked a lot. Longevity imho is a combination of factors, not only diet. Vegan or omnivore, to each their own, I don't think anything excessive is good for us. Moderation, movement, stimulating your mind, human connection. I think these are the most important things.
Nice video though, you keep me curious :)
Thank you so much for being so straightforward about nutrition. Much appreciated.
I think calorie restriction (meaning: not overeating or binge eating) is most important. Any particular diet is just added improvement.
Kind of, sometimes/to some degree. A diet does have an effect on the amount of calories consumed (so caloric restriction or overeating or binge eating), it's not something independent of the diet that you do. You don't apply force of sheer will or something, you don't only and completely CHOOSE how much calories you eat. No, the calories consumed are controlled by the content of your diet (some foods more filling than others, some modulate your hormones to feel hungry all the time thus making you more likely to eat more , some are small and calorie dense and can't fill you up easily unless you eat big quantities which means you go overboard on your calories, etc. etc.) and various other factors.
lmao calories in calories out is whats important. All you really have to do is watch out for trans fats and don't eat an excessive amount of sugar
It's also nice to have a way of eating that doesn't involve hurting others like abusing animals, creating violent jobs, being toxic is running communities, creating zoonotic diseases, deforestation, desertification, dead zones, chronic reviews, chronic reviews, chronic diseases, etc.
@@mitkoogrozevI think it's about forming good habits, and "dieting" is a bad habit. Work out a nutrition plan that works for you, then when you are active, you will drop some bodyfat, being over-active can be a bad habit too, as can underactive. Fuelling fat loss is important. Won't be any quick results
I could be in a caloric restriction eating chips, snack pies and soda, but that would be a piss poor diet. The quality of the calories matter, and it's difficult to overeat on quality calories/foods.
Thank you. You have the voice and understanding of reason.
Excellent rant. Although I eat mostly plant based, I was highly annoyed by the propaganda in the Netflix show.
Would you prefer “propaganda” that was in favour of murdering innocent animals and destroying the planet?
also plant based, despite carnivores insisting I am required to have a "V" title ! ! !
Fantastic. You rock! We need more people with your attitude towards ”the truth”. Love ya!
The study was fine. It is sad how these documentaries muddy the results of the study for the general public.
I agree. The show actually did a disservice to the Stanford study, by providing fuel for those who want to discredit the study due to illegitimate reasons.
The fact they dropped the doc before the study itself has been published / peer reviewed is a bit of a red flag for me tbh. Cart before the horse
If calories weren't equated then you remove the most important variable immediately. Many many health benefits are seen based on lower calorie diets when weight loss occurs regardless of what is eaten, there's a plethora of studies showing this. Weight loss is usually the initial driver of improved health, you're markers improve. (like the Twinkie diet experiment). Correlation vs causation
If they equated calories and the Vegan diet still comes out on top, then you can deduce that a Vegan diet is likely better
The lower calories were when they chose what to eat though. The vast majority of vegans eat less calories than omnivores on average because vegan foods tend to be lower calorically dense and higher fibre so you feel full with less calories. It's hard to control for this variable when people are able to choose their own food. Almost impossible.
People lose more weight on a vegan diet because the fiber makes them feel satiated, so they eat less calories. It's a feature, not a bug.
Even that would not be enough. It would also have to be the same protein amount for example. Also a huge problem is the fact that your previous diet influences the results. If you previously always eat a certain way, for example lots of cheese, then you will not lack nutrients that are high in cheese, but lack nutrients in foods you consume less of. A change to the vegan group will provide you in short terms with a greater food divercity and with the currently lacking nutrients. But following this diet long term might lead to other nutrient deficiencies, so you will benefit by going back to cheese and vice versa. The short duration of the experiment is just a huge problem to predict long term results.
Gardner's experiments are usually to see how real people handle a diet in the real world.
Forcing the calories equal would be the complete opposite of the aim of the experiment and would make the experiment less relevant to real world application.
If you follow two diets without counting calories and one diet gets you to SPONTANEOUSLY reduce your calories that's an important experimental result.
You wouldn't find that information if you forced calorie to be the same.
I study health and nutrition a lot. I’m a huge proponent of regenerative agriculture including farm animals, of eating primarily plants and fungi, and restricting ultraprocessed foods in favor of whole food. While I thought it was educational seeing the disgusting state of the factory farms, and I think it’s awesome to grow mushrooms instead of that, the entire series was slanted. This is just the sort of show my meat-eating friends will use as another example of bad science and propaganda, and they will be right. All the photos of meat were hamburgers or hot dogs. There is much evidence to suggest that dairy yogurt and cheese are actually healthy. The data revealed at the end weren’t even corroborating the statements made throughout the series.
It surely is a biased show, but it doesn't mean all science is bad. Out of curiosity, what statements are you referring to?
More than half the population suffers from digesting lactose. You can't make the blanket statement that dairy and yogurt are healthy for people.
I just want to say, thank you. You are the only MD I have found that is actually not biased. You call out both sides when they are being shady.
A fair percentage of the UA-cam Drs. who talk about nutrition are chiropractors.
@@kitefan1 I am aware of people like Eric Berg. Thanks for informing though.
@@kitefan1😂 Sadly, those chiropractors do not limit their spread of misinformation to just nutrition, many of them also talk about disease management like they were actually MD 🤦🏽♂️
Great breakdown of the show. However, you’ve had Chris Gardner on your channel a bunch, I was honestly a bit surprised that there’s as much criticism of it in lieu of that.
After watching the first episode it became clear that this is a clear example of propaganda. Vegan propaganda. We were interested in the human story so we forwarded through the filler fluff which we knew already from Netflix ‘What the Health.
Disappointing that they couldn’t just stay with the twins.
How is dairy beneficial for breast cancer? I’ve only ever heard of numerous studies on the risks, including the whole issue of Bovine Leukaemia virus, being present in biopsies of over 50% of breast cancers.
present in over 60% of patients diagnosed with breast cancer. Soy milk has been shown to be protective from breast cancer but the misinformers will try to convince it mimics estrogen and is therefore unhealthy, all the while steering people back to dairy. Unbelievable, just absolutely unbelievable.
I hope people can look at the Stanford twin study, and understand the makers of this documentary are adding their narrative on top.
That should be taken with a large grain of salt, but shouldn’t take away from the actual study.
Well done, Dr. Keep up the great work educating on facts and science.
So sad to see all that money and time and energy being invested in a documentary/series that yet again lacks accuracy, honesty, integrity, objectivity, nuance, science, and further pushes emotions, ideology and confusion. Can't wait for all the folks like you picking the claims apart and settling some of the confusion. Thanks!
Loved the rant - spot on. And the rest of your analysis of course.
Well, this is surprising to me: a good friend of mine who is a gastro-enterologists who is specialised in nutrition says that while indeed there is a negative correlation between dairy intake and bowel-cancers, the is a higher risk of breast cancer for people who consume more dairy. I'm not a doctor, so I wouldn't know where to look, but this does confuse me a bit. Two doctors that I tend to trust giving an opposite answer on the breast cancer topic.
Thank you sir
Gil, could you make a video about nutrients such as trace elements and minerals? Here in Germany for example there seems to be an endemic iodine deficiency and vegans or those who follow an almost strict PBD may run into iodine deficency. Seems that only B12 gets mentioned mostly.
Seaweed has iodine and you can overdose on it. One person died of overdose of iodine supplentation. Its micro nutroent not macrl
Is iodine not added to table salt in Germany?
Eat some seaweed! Dried and shredded Wakame seaweed is a great option for natural iodine intake on a plant-based diet 😬
You have to buy iodized salt. 1g of iodized salt covers roughtly 13%, so you would need 8-9g of salt (6g is recommended). Thus, too much salt to dependent upon.
This fortification has probably been done for omnivore diets, as their diet contains some iodine from animal products already, so iodized salt would round up their diets. @@pomberry3591
@@trevorpatterson8712Yeah I know. Could try it in the future my main focus was just to hit iodine. So I bought VEG1 yesterday which contains iodine and is a bit more cost-effective than just seaweed I guess?
Omnivore is many things. Vegan is many things. They're both a matter of the details.
Always reminding me why I’m subbed to your channel. Nice nuanced discussion
Most annoying was that they included the actual twins in the docu. Who cares what they say or do or look like?
The vegan diet was slightly lower in calories, which is pretty nasty for a scientifical study, it especially alters the cholesterol outcome
What would you say if they find people who eat diet 1 (e.g., standard american diet) tend to eat more calories each day than people who eat diet 2, so they have higher bmi's and other measures (e.g., cholesterol, viseral fat, etc.)?
How should the researchers deal with that issue when comparing diets?
Gil's first video (3-4 min) addresses this issue
I don't think they took pictures of their genitals. Rather, I believe that used thermal imaging (wavelengths outside human visual range). They did appear to create thermal images, which appeared to be blurred in the show.
Your objectivity is much apreciated 👍
Snow day at work so I finally get to make the first comment ;-)
Edit: Re unreliable information rant, the lack of reliable sources of information for people who don't have time, energy, or skill to do literature reviews on any topic that they want to learn about, is why channels like this are so valuable. I am capable of doing fairly solid research into what the current state of knowledge on a given topic is (I have a Ph.D. in an unrelated field), but I am not going to make a full-time job of studying nutrition. For me personally, if I catch a few problems, that don't get corrected in an appropriate way, I stop watching the content. Dr. Greger (you showed his picture) is a good example. I watched some of his videos a few years ago, because I like to hear good news about things I already support, but he is more of a salesman than a purveyor of reliable information, which, as you point out, makes him a bad salesman. I would rather get solid information.
mmh how does it snow at work?
@@stefanbuttigieg3750 Work was cancelled due to the snow (which I didn't find out until I had already driven to work in the snow ;-)
People have a hard time giving up cheese because it is delicious...No studies needed to figure this out.
Honestly, is there a better, more actually unbiased nutrition source like this not just on YT but anywhere online? This channel is a treasure trove of insights and honest dissection of research, unironically.
For realll 🥲
He is totally correct about people seeing bad data and losing credibility on the rest of the work because I was into this show until I heard a couple questionable segments and could just not convince myself to finish watching. I’m interested to see the results, but not bad enough to overlook the bias perspective of the show.
As someone who was vegetarian for 25 years, and who was addicted to Mac n cheese and pizza, but who has been vegan for over two years now, I do believe casomorphines are addictive. I feel much better now and my health has improved. Giving up dairy is definitely a renunciation, not unlike giving up other addictions.
lmao as someone who has suffered from extreme addictions its actually disrespectful that you say this. To compare dairy to drug and other addictions is crazy especially when the evidence says that they are not addictive in humans. Keep living your life the way you want but just know your probably experiencing placebo
Maybe your body was craving the nutrients in the cheese you were eating.
I think more has to do with the combination of fat and salt
I think you’re right about the natural morphine in dairy especially cheese. I have noticed that too.
@@glumberty1maybe the body is craving the cocaine and crack? The nicotine and cigarettes? Nah
I felt like this could have been two completely separate shows. I was super interested in the experiment but when it started shifting towards vegan propaganda, I lost interest pretty quickly - I’m very interested in going plant based but just don’t like some of the dishonesty around it.
Meanwhile in Italy, Switzerland and France we eat a lot of cheese and meat and are very healthy.
France aren't healthy? You been recently? Full of obesity and illness. But, that's probably from all the fast food and bread rather than good meat and cheese.
What are you talking about? thousands of peoples are still dying from the first cause of human death, vascular problem mainly from eating too much meat, dairy, and eggs full of salt, oxydized cholesterol and saturated fat.
France has astronomical levels of heart disease. Mediterranean diet however is kinda the best
Thank you for this review. I even think the producers of the series would mostly agree with you. I am vegan for one reason only and it is not diet. It is that I do not want to participate, as much as is possible to, in the harm and torture of sentient beings. Even if a plant based diet was not the most healthy, I would remain vegan. This is just my world view and not virtue signalling. I do however believe we also need to pay attention to our health for the sake of our families and society as a whole. We need honest science based studies and information, I thank you for your work in this regard.
Great review. Very funny! I do hope you NEVER get cancelled :)
We all appreciate your videos.
I did found the documentary to be interesting and well-intentioned, however some of that was overshadowed by the heavy bias.
I think both arguments can be true but the presentation needs to be 100% objective.
Thank you! I felt the same way watching this series. I’m a self-advocate of eating ‘mostly plants’ but my inner-skeptic was blinking “cherry-picked” and “anecdotal” throughout much of this ‘documentary.’ I think its editorial feel did a disservice to plant-based diets by adding to the ‘noise’.
Why does Netflix only show Vegan shows?
Seems like it... Netflix seems to be all about wokeism these days
Spill the beans. Right into my bowl. Yessir. Thank you very much. Delish. 😊
Good to see doctor can speak portuguese, I can see in the background "Cirurgia' and Arte :)
I'd like to see more follow-up on the Adventist study that seemed to indicate that mostly plant based with a little animal protein had a slightly better results than 100% plant. I don't like how we are pushed to join to join a 100% tribe on either side.
I hate that too. Not everything from the one side is good and all from the other side is bad. It's just an imaginary and unnecessairy line drawn which has nothing to do with a perfect diet considering health. Not every plant in every amount is good and healthy just because it's a plant, and the same is true for meat and dairy. There are good and bad sides for every single food. Why would you want to exclude something just because it's part of a virtual group? It's the moderation and variety combined with your specific nutrient requirements and specific intolerances that makes a good diet. If you're overweight a lower caloric diet is the way to go - vegan is one option there. If you are extremly slim and recovering from a surgery your body has huge needs for calories and protein, so the better amino acid profile of animal protein and higher caloric density of cheese might help your body to recover faster.
The problem with studies like this is they compare the plant based diets with "everyone else", which of course includes the vast majority who eat the standard American crap diet. Of course they are going to look better.
In terms of longevity, the pure plant based Adventist do the best. Not sure what you mean by "slightly better" but it certainly isn't longevity.
Indeed. When I finally started reading further than just the highlighted bits in the studies dr Greger showed on his channel, I realised that quite often the further information contradicted what he said. I lost complete faith with in him and stopped following him. Then I also started questioning the claims of other vegan doctors and found some of them to be economical with their information too. Then I found that some of the low carb doctors also cherry pick their information. Before I lost complete faith in humanity though, I luckily found this channel, which is now my favourite and go to channel for nutritional information. Thanks Gil.
Thank you for being one of the very very few sites promoting science and common sense.
Everything on Netflix is propaganda. Even kids' movies.
You seem to have embraced some healthy skepticism which is far more interesting and helpful to listen to. Looking forward to more critical thinking.
I’m not vegan. I have stopped eating all sugars, I’m at 20 net carbs per day, I eat eggs, almond malk, chicken, turkey, fish, string beans and cheese. Dx T2D 8/2022 at 12.5 A1c. Now at 5.4. Lost 60 pounds. No processed foods or alcohol. It’s important to find what’s right for you.
Very interesting setup using twins, but vegan vs omni is too wishywashy to tell much of anything.. except something on the vegan side.
Sadly the show started pushing the vegan agenda almost immediately which showed they were gunning for their biased result so I lost interest in the show mid first episode. Already tons of biased vegan shows / "scientists" out there.
Hopefully some day we get similar setup with a real scientist with better setup and a real interest to gather some new usable data which is really useful.
I was 495lbs. I had NAFLD diagnosed by my doctor both with blood work and using an ultrasound. I kept eating what my doctor told me, I exercised and I kept getting fatter and fatter and more metabolically unhealthy. I was on the list to have gastric bypass surgery but because I was so high risk I was told I needed to lose 80lbs in order to have the surgery safely because I was a walking heart attack. Imagine that, being told to lose weight to have surgery to help me lose weight. Anyway, that is when I turned to High Fat Keto and it changed my life. I didn't even count the calories. I ate until I felt full but kept my carbs to 20gr a day and ate unprocessed foods. The weight fell off like magic. I combined this with intermittent fasting with a 6 hour eating window and I completely reversed my Type-2 Diabetes, Insulin resistance, high cholesterol, high triglycerides and I'm no longer obese 7 years later. All with just changing what I ate. No surgery, I came off all my medications. I now do OMAD instead of the 6 hour eating window and I feel amazing. I'm so thankful because as luck would have it I slipped and fell and ended up with a spinal cord injury which left me mostly paralyzed from the waist down and due to my chronic pain from the injury I'm very sedentary and can't do much in terms of exercise but I have been able to manage my weight quite successfully with my Ketogenic ultra-low carb diet. So that there should stand as an example that we are what we eat and while exercise has many benefits for health and I'm not denying that, you CAN be metabolically healthy without it through diet alone because I am proof of that!
Maybe the mention of dairy being associated with higher prostate cancer risk and the omission of dairy being associated with lower colorectal cancer and breast cancer risk is due to the fact that in the case of prostate cancer risk the association is very strong (and there's little you can do to mitigate it if you are consuming dairy), while the association with lower breast cancer risk is very controversial, with many studies showing no significant association and some suggesting higher risk (it probably depends on what you substitute dairy for. If you are substituting dairy for meat, it may be protective, but if you study a vegetarian population, milk is associated with increased risk - see the Adventist Health Study-2, for example), and in case of colorectal cancer risk, the association is mainly thought to be explained by calcium intake, which you can easily get from other foods. As you said in the video: it is a docuseries. They don't have the time to go over all the details, and it would be a disservice to present the "mixed" evidence as if the evidence pointing to positive health benefits is as strong and significant as the evidence pointing to negative health benefits. It would just get people confused, which is exactly what the industry wants. Remember the motto of the tobacco industry: "doubt is our product".
I mean- you have to admit it was biased. No one should shame ANYONE about what they eat. Vegan, or if they have animal products. Different people have different needs. And I hope you all take that into consideration.
I totally agree with you! They talk all about the harmful ways that meat is made, but they say nothing about how harmful all these highly-processed vegan products can be. It seemed more like an advertising campaign for certain brands than an actual unbiased documentary. I don't know how Tim Spector agreed to appear in this show, he is all about avoiding highly processed foods, vegan or otherwise, so I doubt he endorses any of these products promoted there. I found the documentary really disappointing.
Thanks for all you do. I learn something new in every episode.
Excellent Review !
You are so right in your rant about cherry-picking information/data - thank you for pointing it out