What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Doing your own research (3 Viewers)

Status
Not open for further replies.
Interesting as it seems like this discussion is happening in other places as well.

From Calley Means. Former lobbyist. (And please don't turn this political as his sister, Stanford MD Dr. Casey Means was nominated for Surgeon General.)

My point is this conversation seems to be happening a lot.

I recently had a conversation with a friend who runs a clinic network of 1,000+ MDs.

She said the main conversation among doctors is frustration that patients are asking about the "root cause" and "more natural cures" for their conditions.

She said 0% of patients asked these questions five years ago, and now 80% of patients do.

Her doctors see this trend as a negative thing, and spend their time deriding the MAHA movement and social media personalities in the breakroom.

These clinics focus on dermatology and make money selling drugs and procedures. Many dermatological issues are tied to root cause issues (diet/lifestyle) and not a lack of cream or injection.

On Reddit boards, countless medical professionals are decrying these "root cause" questions.

I think this represents a major shift/dynamic happening in medicine that should be openly discussed. Are patients' right to be asking more questions about the root cause, or are the doctors right to be deriding Americans for taking health into their own hands? To be asking about food, exercise, over-medicalization, and lifestyle habits...

Should patients trust their doctors on chronic disease management? Can patients actually reverse their conditions and thrive if they explore the root cause? Are the answers simpler and more under our control than we believe?

I think the answer is clearly yes. I hope the trend of patients asking doctors for the root cause doesn't slow down, and it not only changes how we practice medicine, but also changes our culture to be more empowered.

If you have an acute condition that will kill you right away, see your doctor and listen to them. Our system is a miracle at addressing these acute issues. But that's less than 10% of our spending.

Our system's failure at chronic disease management has economic, national defense, and spiritual effects that are existential.

We need to have respect for our food and our soil. We need to cherish breastfeeding and natural food... We need to ensure kids are away from their phones and outside running around... We need to rejuvenate a grounding in the spiritual...

These are the messages our healthcare leaders should be repeating again and again - and that light is starting to shine through, despite aggressive resistance from hard-working doctors whose income and identity are undeniably tied to the broken status quo.
This post is 100% what I would expect Calley Means to post - he attacks traditional medicine and food and owns a company that pushes wellness products. Seems like a grift that has aircover with MAHA.
This is a serious question as i have no idea who Calley Means is, but what is wrong with what they said here?
Feels like attack the messenger when you can't attack the message.

Thought the article hit on the big point with root cause. Patients should want to know the root cause of their issues. And if a doctor doesn't want to explore that and explain it then the patient should be looking for a better doctor.

A lot of those "attacks" on traditional medicine and food are valid. There's a ton of unhealthy chemicals and junk in our food that the average person has no idea what is entering their body. Traditional medicine wants to push pills to fix everything instead of addressing root cause. I'm sure there's no financial incentives in the transaction between pharma reps visiting doctors and doctors overprescribing pills for everything if we are going to talk grifts.
Yeah, if people are happy with a bandaid approach that's fine. I see it all the time, gave an example with a family member earlier in this thread.

What i don't understand is the hostility towards wanting to find and fix the root cause of an illness through lifestyle modification (diet instead of statins if possible for instance).

As a general matter (I presume there are anecdotal examples), are doctors really hostile to lifestyle modification in their patients as a way to improve health?
Sorry, i meant referring to the initial post as a grift, which maybe it is, but i found what i read completely reasonable in a vacuum. I don't think most doctors are hostile to lifestyle modification, but i will add i believe some may think it's a waste of their time if they believe patients aren't willing.
Calley Means sells supplements, herbal remedies, and wellness products on his TrueMed platform. He had a vision in a sweat lodge of connecting RFK Jr. together with Trump.

Vanity Fair Article

He had a popular appearance on the Tucker Carlson podcast with his sister - Calley & Casey Means: The Truth About Ozempic, the Pill, and How Big Pharma Keeps You Sick

Polarizing people - if you want to pay $300 for more bloodwork or wear a CGM, I'm all for it. I track my steps and heartrate on my watch and I consume vegan protein powder.
All this.

And Casey Means was a few months away from finishing her ENT residency (which has nothing to do with nutritional health, btw) and then "left". The reality is that doesn't happen unless she wasn't going to be able to finish and her program doesn't sign off. That's a HUGE red flag. Greater than 99 % chance she didn't leave voluntarily.

Here's a reddit thread that discusses this a little bit.
It’s really interesting how often ENT, and other surgical subspecialists in training choose an alternative path. Never seems like self proclaimed health gurus start out as primary care providers.
 
Interesting as it seems like this discussion is happening in other places as well.

From Calley Means. Former lobbyist. (And please don't turn this political as his sister, Stanford MD Dr. Casey Means was nominated for Surgeon General.)

My point is this conversation seems to be happening a lot.

I recently had a conversation with a friend who runs a clinic network of 1,000+ MDs.

She said the main conversation among doctors is frustration that patients are asking about the "root cause" and "more natural cures" for their conditions.

She said 0% of patients asked these questions five years ago, and now 80% of patients do.

Her doctors see this trend as a negative thing, and spend their time deriding the MAHA movement and social media personalities in the breakroom.

These clinics focus on dermatology and make money selling drugs and procedures. Many dermatological issues are tied to root cause issues (diet/lifestyle) and not a lack of cream or injection.

On Reddit boards, countless medical professionals are decrying these "root cause" questions.

I think this represents a major shift/dynamic happening in medicine that should be openly discussed. Are patients' right to be asking more questions about the root cause, or are the doctors right to be deriding Americans for taking health into their own hands? To be asking about food, exercise, over-medicalization, and lifestyle habits...

Should patients trust their doctors on chronic disease management? Can patients actually reverse their conditions and thrive if they explore the root cause? Are the answers simpler and more under our control than we believe?

I think the answer is clearly yes. I hope the trend of patients asking doctors for the root cause doesn't slow down, and it not only changes how we practice medicine, but also changes our culture to be more empowered.

If you have an acute condition that will kill you right away, see your doctor and listen to them. Our system is a miracle at addressing these acute issues. But that's less than 10% of our spending.

Our system's failure at chronic disease management has economic, national defense, and spiritual effects that are existential.

We need to have respect for our food and our soil. We need to cherish breastfeeding and natural food... We need to ensure kids are away from their phones and outside running around... We need to rejuvenate a grounding in the spiritual...

These are the messages our healthcare leaders should be repeating again and again - and that light is starting to shine through, despite aggressive resistance from hard-working doctors whose income and identity are undeniably tied to the broken status quo.
This post is 100% what I would expect Calley Means to post - he attacks traditional medicine and food and owns a company that pushes wellness products. Seems like a grift that has aircover with MAHA.
This is a serious question as i have no idea who Calley Means is, but what is wrong with what they said here?
Feels like attack the messenger when you can't attack the message.

Thought the article hit on the big point with root cause. Patients should want to know the root cause of their issues. And if a doctor doesn't want to explore that and explain it then the patient should be looking for a better doctor.

A lot of those "attacks" on traditional medicine and food are valid. There's a ton of unhealthy chemicals and junk in our food that the average person has no idea what is entering their body. Traditional medicine wants to push pills to fix everything instead of addressing root cause. I'm sure there's no financial incentives in the transaction between pharma reps visiting doctors and doctors overprescribing pills for everything if we are going to talk grifts.
Yeah, if people are happy with a bandaid approach that's fine. I see it all the time, gave an example with a family member earlier in this thread.

What i don't understand is the hostility towards wanting to find and fix the root cause of an illness through lifestyle modification (diet instead of statins if possible for instance).

As a general matter (I presume there are anecdotal examples), are doctors really hostile to lifestyle modification in their patients as a way to improve health?
1000% no, imo.

But most doctors are woefully undertrained in nutrition and exercise science. So they aren’t qualified to discuss specifics.

And they are time-strapped, with an understanding how often lifestyle modification fails. So many just cut to the chase of prescribing meds, to “do something” now.
Medication seems like the quickest way to subdue the negative effects of some conditions and even if lifestyle changes are implemented they may take longer to take effect and the medications can bridge that gap. I find it hard to believe a significant percentage of doctors ignore lifestyle changes.

I have a GI condition EoE and when I was first diagnosed I had to do an elimination diet in combination with a steroid. My doctor preferred just the elimination diet, but my condition and inflammation was so bad that he wanted me on both until they could get the inflammation under control. Once that happened I stopped the steroids and resumed the elimination diet. I’ve done a bunch of endoscopies over the years testing inflammation levels and have gone on and off the steroids to test how my body is reacting. I’m at a point now where I control with diet alone and get annual endoscopies to monitor.

My wife’s cousin’s girlfriend is some natural health coach who would probably get along with a bunch of people in here. She thinks my condition is a result of genetically modified foods and that I could restart my system if I go on a diet of raw, organic milk. My EoE trigger is dairy so I told her to pound sand. My wife and I try to avoid them at all costs when we go to family functions.
 
Interesting as it seems like this discussion is happening in other places as well.

From Calley Means. Former lobbyist. (And please don't turn this political as his sister, Stanford MD Dr. Casey Means was nominated for Surgeon General.)

My point is this conversation seems to be happening a lot.

I recently had a conversation with a friend who runs a clinic network of 1,000+ MDs.

She said the main conversation among doctors is frustration that patients are asking about the "root cause" and "more natural cures" for their conditions.

She said 0% of patients asked these questions five years ago, and now 80% of patients do.

Her doctors see this trend as a negative thing, and spend their time deriding the MAHA movement and social media personalities in the breakroom.

These clinics focus on dermatology and make money selling drugs and procedures. Many dermatological issues are tied to root cause issues (diet/lifestyle) and not a lack of cream or injection.

On Reddit boards, countless medical professionals are decrying these "root cause" questions.

I think this represents a major shift/dynamic happening in medicine that should be openly discussed. Are patients' right to be asking more questions about the root cause, or are the doctors right to be deriding Americans for taking health into their own hands? To be asking about food, exercise, over-medicalization, and lifestyle habits...

Should patients trust their doctors on chronic disease management? Can patients actually reverse their conditions and thrive if they explore the root cause? Are the answers simpler and more under our control than we believe?

I think the answer is clearly yes. I hope the trend of patients asking doctors for the root cause doesn't slow down, and it not only changes how we practice medicine, but also changes our culture to be more empowered.

If you have an acute condition that will kill you right away, see your doctor and listen to them. Our system is a miracle at addressing these acute issues. But that's less than 10% of our spending.

Our system's failure at chronic disease management has economic, national defense, and spiritual effects that are existential.

We need to have respect for our food and our soil. We need to cherish breastfeeding and natural food... We need to ensure kids are away from their phones and outside running around... We need to rejuvenate a grounding in the spiritual...

These are the messages our healthcare leaders should be repeating again and again - and that light is starting to shine through, despite aggressive resistance from hard-working doctors whose income and identity are undeniably tied to the broken status quo.
This post is 100% what I would expect Calley Means to post - he attacks traditional medicine and food and owns a company that pushes wellness products. Seems like a grift that has aircover with MAHA.
This is a serious question as i have no idea who Calley Means is, but what is wrong with what they said here?
Feels like attack the messenger when you can't attack the message.

Thought the article hit on the big point with root cause. Patients should want to know the root cause of their issues. And if a doctor doesn't want to explore that and explain it then the patient should be looking for a better doctor.

A lot of those "attacks" on traditional medicine and food are valid. There's a ton of unhealthy chemicals and junk in our food that the average person has no idea what is entering their body. Traditional medicine wants to push pills to fix everything instead of addressing root cause. I'm sure there's no financial incentives in the transaction between pharma reps visiting doctors and doctors overprescribing pills for everything if we are going to talk grifts.
Yeah, if people are happy with a bandaid approach that's fine. I see it all the time, gave an example with a family member earlier in this thread.

What i don't understand is the hostility towards wanting to find and fix the root cause of an illness through lifestyle modification (diet instead of statins if possible for instance).

As a general matter (I presume there are anecdotal examples), are doctors really hostile to lifestyle modification in their patients as a way to improve health?
Sorry, i meant referring to the initial post as a grift, which maybe it is, but i found what i read completely reasonable in a vacuum. I don't think most doctors are hostile to lifestyle modification, but i will add i believe some may think it's a waste of their time if they believe patients aren't willing.
Calley Means sells supplements, herbal remedies, and wellness products on his TrueMed platform. He had a vision in a sweat lodge of connecting RFK Jr. together with Trump.

Vanity Fair Article

He had a popular appearance on the Tucker Carlson podcast with his sister - Calley & Casey Means: The Truth About Ozempic, the Pill, and How Big Pharma Keeps You Sick

Polarizing people - if you want to pay $300 for more bloodwork or wear a CGM, I'm all for it. I track my steps and heartrate on my watch and I consume vegan protein powder.
All this.

And Casey Means was a few months away from finishing her ENT residency (which has nothing to do with nutritional health, btw) and then "left". The reality is that doesn't happen unless she wasn't going to be able to finish and her program doesn't sign off. That's a HUGE red flag. Greater than 99 % chance she didn't leave voluntarily.

Here's a reddit thread that discusses this a little bit.
And through all of this we’ve yet to hear what any of the objections about what was actually written are.
There's not really much objection to the overall message. You won't find many people that would argue with the basic premise of eating better and exercising. There's nothing groundbreaking about that.

Paying money for unnecessary tests, wearing glucose monitors when you don't have diabetes? That's just part of the bigger issue. That's the grift.
Is there objection to paying for unnecessary tests?
Yes. Unnecessary tests are, ummm , unnecessary. They waste time and money, at the minimum. More importantly, they can lead to downstream testing and procedures, incurring additional costs and risk for complications.
 
Interesting as it seems like this discussion is happening in other places as well.

From Calley Means. Former lobbyist. (And please don't turn this political as his sister, Stanford MD Dr. Casey Means was nominated for Surgeon General.)

My point is this conversation seems to be happening a lot.

I recently had a conversation with a friend who runs a clinic network of 1,000+ MDs.

She said the main conversation among doctors is frustration that patients are asking about the "root cause" and "more natural cures" for their conditions.

She said 0% of patients asked these questions five years ago, and now 80% of patients do.

Her doctors see this trend as a negative thing, and spend their time deriding the MAHA movement and social media personalities in the breakroom.

These clinics focus on dermatology and make money selling drugs and procedures. Many dermatological issues are tied to root cause issues (diet/lifestyle) and not a lack of cream or injection.

On Reddit boards, countless medical professionals are decrying these "root cause" questions.

I think this represents a major shift/dynamic happening in medicine that should be openly discussed. Are patients' right to be asking more questions about the root cause, or are the doctors right to be deriding Americans for taking health into their own hands? To be asking about food, exercise, over-medicalization, and lifestyle habits...

Should patients trust their doctors on chronic disease management? Can patients actually reverse their conditions and thrive if they explore the root cause? Are the answers simpler and more under our control than we believe?

I think the answer is clearly yes. I hope the trend of patients asking doctors for the root cause doesn't slow down, and it not only changes how we practice medicine, but also changes our culture to be more empowered.

If you have an acute condition that will kill you right away, see your doctor and listen to them. Our system is a miracle at addressing these acute issues. But that's less than 10% of our spending.

Our system's failure at chronic disease management has economic, national defense, and spiritual effects that are existential.

We need to have respect for our food and our soil. We need to cherish breastfeeding and natural food... We need to ensure kids are away from their phones and outside running around... We need to rejuvenate a grounding in the spiritual...

These are the messages our healthcare leaders should be repeating again and again - and that light is starting to shine through, despite aggressive resistance from hard-working doctors whose income and identity are undeniably tied to the broken status quo.
Very interesting that this is becoming a bigger topic. Part of me is glad to see this — information is a good thing, self advocacy is a good thing, wanting to take care of your own health is a good thing.

Part of me is saddened because — let’s be honest here — this trend accelerated massively due to vaccine mandates. We were already headed that way with stupid people like my cousin believing that vaccines cause autism because Jenny McCarthy told her it was true. This is bat **** crazy of course, but unfortunately it is the darker side of self advocacy. And it is, IMHO, the OPs original intent when talking about the phrase “do your own research.” It really means “I have the answer already, from my next door neighbor Gladys, and I’m not leaving the doctor’s office satisfied until he/she agrees with the expert opinion of Gladys, who did the research herself.”

On the flip side, I’ve had direct personal experience with doctors not knowing the answers, but not admitting that they don’t know. And not showing any urgency to find the answers. My FIL has Parkinson’s, probably dementia too. But we don’t know, because nobody knows for sure what his diagnosis is. 2-3 GPs and multiple specialists have arrived at varying answers over the past SIX TO SEVEN YEARS.

Now before all the FBGs doctors jump in here to slam me, my BIL is a rheumatologist. Two of the experts we’ve seen are in his large teaching hospital. We’ve had the same possible diagnosis 3 times in 7 years — ruled out multiple times because “one small item simply doesn’t fit.” Only to circle back to that same diagnosis for each doctor that sees him. Why? 🤷‍♂️

My BIL thinks this is all normal. Even though he admits that it isn’t. He’s unwilling to question or challenge anything the other doctors say, even when they say illogical things. We treat doctors like gods, but they are simply just people. Really knowledgeable and well trained people. Usually very well intentioned people.

But they are humans. They all have strengths and weaknesses. They (mostly) have confirmation bias just like (most) other human beings. And bluntly, not all of them are that smart, and not all of them are able to handle tough logic puzzles — but for a specialist, that’s actually their job much of the time!

So yeah — I “do my own research” sometimes. And I ask questions. And poke. And prod. And make doctors mildly uncomfortable at times.

But I also know I’m not the expert. Not the doctor. I’m an advocate for myself and my family. And also at the core more logical and problem-solving adept than 95+% of doctors. ;)
Good post. A doctor’s word isn’t the word of god. They should show humility, and embrace shared decision making. Medicine is a huge field, with many unanswered questions, so there’s no shame in admitting you don’t know it all.

You very well may be better at problem-solving than 95% of physicians. Still, you may need to embrace humility as well, as intelligence doesn’t supplant knowledge, or experience.

And how should a physician handle a deluge of questions, root cause analysis, and alternative medicine discussions with patients who aren’t so preternaturally gifted?
 
Interesting as it seems like this discussion is happening in other places as well.

From Calley Means. Former lobbyist. (And please don't turn this political as his sister, Stanford MD Dr. Casey Means was nominated for Surgeon General.)

My point is this conversation seems to be happening a lot.

I recently had a conversation with a friend who runs a clinic network of 1,000+ MDs.

She said the main conversation among doctors is frustration that patients are asking about the "root cause" and "more natural cures" for their conditions.

She said 0% of patients asked these questions five years ago, and now 80% of patients do.

Her doctors see this trend as a negative thing, and spend their time deriding the MAHA movement and social media personalities in the breakroom.

These clinics focus on dermatology and make money selling drugs and procedures. Many dermatological issues are tied to root cause issues (diet/lifestyle) and not a lack of cream or injection.

On Reddit boards, countless medical professionals are decrying these "root cause" questions.

I think this represents a major shift/dynamic happening in medicine that should be openly discussed. Are patients' right to be asking more questions about the root cause, or are the doctors right to be deriding Americans for taking health into their own hands? To be asking about food, exercise, over-medicalization, and lifestyle habits...

Should patients trust their doctors on chronic disease management? Can patients actually reverse their conditions and thrive if they explore the root cause? Are the answers simpler and more under our control than we believe?

I think the answer is clearly yes. I hope the trend of patients asking doctors for the root cause doesn't slow down, and it not only changes how we practice medicine, but also changes our culture to be more empowered.

If you have an acute condition that will kill you right away, see your doctor and listen to them. Our system is a miracle at addressing these acute issues. But that's less than 10% of our spending.

Our system's failure at chronic disease management has economic, national defense, and spiritual effects that are existential.

We need to have respect for our food and our soil. We need to cherish breastfeeding and natural food... We need to ensure kids are away from their phones and outside running around... We need to rejuvenate a grounding in the spiritual...

These are the messages our healthcare leaders should be repeating again and again - and that light is starting to shine through, despite aggressive resistance from hard-working doctors whose income and identity are undeniably tied to the broken status quo.
This post is 100% what I would expect Calley Means to post - he attacks traditional medicine and food and owns a company that pushes wellness products. Seems like a grift that has aircover with MAHA.
This is a serious question as i have no idea who Calley Means is, but what is wrong with what they said here?
Feels like attack the messenger when you can't attack the message.

Thought the article hit on the big point with root cause. Patients should want to know the root cause of their issues. And if a doctor doesn't want to explore that and explain it then the patient should be looking for a better doctor.

A lot of those "attacks" on traditional medicine and food are valid. There's a ton of unhealthy chemicals and junk in our food that the average person has no idea what is entering their body. Traditional medicine wants to push pills to fix everything instead of addressing root cause. I'm sure there's no financial incentives in the transaction between pharma reps visiting doctors and doctors overprescribing pills for everything if we are going to talk grifts.
Yeah, if people are happy with a bandaid approach that's fine. I see it all the time, gave an example with a family member earlier in this thread.

What i don't understand is the hostility towards wanting to find and fix the root cause of an illness through lifestyle modification (diet instead of statins if possible for instance).

As a general matter (I presume there are anecdotal examples), are doctors really hostile to lifestyle modification in their patients as a way to improve health?
Sorry, i meant referring to the initial post as a grift, which maybe it is, but i found what i read completely reasonable in a vacuum. I don't think most doctors are hostile to lifestyle modification, but i will add i believe some may think it's a waste of their time if they believe patients aren't willing.
Calley Means sells supplements, herbal remedies, and wellness products on his TrueMed platform. He had a vision in a sweat lodge of connecting RFK Jr. together with Trump.

Vanity Fair Article

He had a popular appearance on the Tucker Carlson podcast with his sister - Calley & Casey Means: The Truth About Ozempic, the Pill, and How Big Pharma Keeps You Sick

Polarizing people - if you want to pay $300 for more bloodwork or wear a CGM, I'm all for it. I track my steps and heartrate on my watch and I consume vegan protein powder.
All this.

And Casey Means was a few months away from finishing her ENT residency (which has nothing to do with nutritional health, btw) and then "left". The reality is that doesn't happen unless she wasn't going to be able to finish and her program doesn't sign off. That's a HUGE red flag. Greater than 99 % chance she didn't leave voluntarily.

Here's a reddit thread that discusses this a little bit.
It’s really interesting how often ENT, and other surgical subspecialists in training choose an alternative path. Never seems like self proclaimed health gurus start out as primary care providers.
Really interesting when you go through 4 years of college, 4 years of medical school, then 4 years of ENT residency doing 80+ hours/week, being on call, three separate Step exams, and 6 months away from finishing to complete that residency and deciding "nah, this isn't for me".

And given the fact that residency programs get dinged really hard if they don't graduate one of their residents, then it must have been pretty worrisome that they weren't going to be willing to sign off on her competency.
 
Thought this comment and reply on the Means thread was interesting.

A person said, "One big issue I have with the idea of ‘root cause’ is that it’s often a very reductionist view. People are chasing THE root cause when actually it’s more likely to be a web of root causes. "

Means replied: https://x.com/calleymeans/status/1942304382579609948

Nobody is saying that the root cause isn't multi-factorial.

But imagine a patient with infertility, anxiety, obesity, and pre-diabetes (in many ways the median American).

Wack-a-mole with four different sets of pills masks (and probably worsens) the underlying cause of these issues - which is demonstrably the same thing.

That patient could be recommended and incentivized to be more mindful of their sleep, eating, movement, and over-medication.

Empowerment and incentivization to investigate these root cause factors could come from the medical system. That is absolutely a multi-factorial problem to solve, but that patient is certainly on a better trajectory (both in reversing their conditions, but also along the journey as they take more empowerment) than the one stuck on the wack-a-mole intervention "management" treadmill.

The roots of our inter-connected chronic disease crisis are simple - and the defining battle in health over the next 10 years will be whether that view takes hold or we will be convinced it is normal to be sick from the existing medical system and the media it funds.

My MD friend has expressed to me the same frustrations. Treating symptons instead of the root cause is a challenge.

I also experienced some of this with my Dad before he passed and my father in law now. Seeing multiple doctors for multiple problems can be a challenge when it seems there could be better communication between them.
My issue with this Joe is that it implies that doctors are not suggesting the natural remedies. I would think they often are, or in the cases where they are not there is some clear evidence that behavior won't change (the subject has been a patient for a decade and hasn't heeded prior warnings). I don't think its as simple as Dr's just default to prescribing medications.

There is room for improvement from both sides.
I would say most patients don’t want to make changes to their lifestyle. They may say they do, but giving up things that they’re addicted to and/or starting and sticking to an exercise regime is hella hard.

It’s MUCH easier to just take a few pills.
💯

Unfortunately, “I’ll work on my diet, and exercise” is often code for leave me the **** alone.

When statements like that are made, it’s important for doctors to follow up with specifics:

How will your diet change, what type of exercise?
Do you need additional information to formulate an actionable plan for lifestyle modification?
How long will you pursue this plan before considering alternative or adjunctive treatments?
What are your long term goals?

Unfortunately, these questions often delve into very uncomfortable territory, where evidence based recommendations may not be possible.
 
Interesting as it seems like this discussion is happening in other places as well.

From Calley Means. Former lobbyist. (And please don't turn this political as his sister, Stanford MD Dr. Casey Means was nominated for Surgeon General.)

My point is this conversation seems to be happening a lot.

I recently had a conversation with a friend who runs a clinic network of 1,000+ MDs.

She said the main conversation among doctors is frustration that patients are asking about the "root cause" and "more natural cures" for their conditions.

She said 0% of patients asked these questions five years ago, and now 80% of patients do.

Her doctors see this trend as a negative thing, and spend their time deriding the MAHA movement and social media personalities in the breakroom.

These clinics focus on dermatology and make money selling drugs and procedures. Many dermatological issues are tied to root cause issues (diet/lifestyle) and not a lack of cream or injection.

On Reddit boards, countless medical professionals are decrying these "root cause" questions.

I think this represents a major shift/dynamic happening in medicine that should be openly discussed. Are patients' right to be asking more questions about the root cause, or are the doctors right to be deriding Americans for taking health into their own hands? To be asking about food, exercise, over-medicalization, and lifestyle habits...

Should patients trust their doctors on chronic disease management? Can patients actually reverse their conditions and thrive if they explore the root cause? Are the answers simpler and more under our control than we believe?

I think the answer is clearly yes. I hope the trend of patients asking doctors for the root cause doesn't slow down, and it not only changes how we practice medicine, but also changes our culture to be more empowered.

If you have an acute condition that will kill you right away, see your doctor and listen to them. Our system is a miracle at addressing these acute issues. But that's less than 10% of our spending.

Our system's failure at chronic disease management has economic, national defense, and spiritual effects that are existential.

We need to have respect for our food and our soil. We need to cherish breastfeeding and natural food... We need to ensure kids are away from their phones and outside running around... We need to rejuvenate a grounding in the spiritual...

These are the messages our healthcare leaders should be repeating again and again - and that light is starting to shine through, despite aggressive resistance from hard-working doctors whose income and identity are undeniably tied to the broken status quo.
This post is 100% what I would expect Calley Means to post - he attacks traditional medicine and food and owns a company that pushes wellness products. Seems like a grift that has aircover with MAHA.
This is a serious question as i have no idea who Calley Means is, but what is wrong with what they said here?
Feels like attack the messenger when you can't attack the message.

Thought the article hit on the big point with root cause. Patients should want to know the root cause of their issues. And if a doctor doesn't want to explore that and explain it then the patient should be looking for a better doctor.

A lot of those "attacks" on traditional medicine and food are valid. There's a ton of unhealthy chemicals and junk in our food that the average person has no idea what is entering their body. Traditional medicine wants to push pills to fix everything instead of addressing root cause. I'm sure there's no financial incentives in the transaction between pharma reps visiting doctors and doctors overprescribing pills for everything if we are going to talk grifts.
Yeah, if people are happy with a bandaid approach that's fine. I see it all the time, gave an example with a family member earlier in this thread.

What i don't understand is the hostility towards wanting to find and fix the root cause of an illness through lifestyle modification (diet instead of statins if possible for instance).

As a general matter (I presume there are anecdotal examples), are doctors really hostile to lifestyle modification in their patients as a way to improve health?
Sorry, i meant referring to the initial post as a grift, which maybe it is, but i found what i read completely reasonable in a vacuum. I don't think most doctors are hostile to lifestyle modification, but i will add i believe some may think it's a waste of their time if they believe patients aren't willing.
Calley Means sells supplements, herbal remedies, and wellness products on his TrueMed platform. He had a vision in a sweat lodge of connecting RFK Jr. together with Trump.

Vanity Fair Article

He had a popular appearance on the Tucker Carlson podcast with his sister - Calley & Casey Means: The Truth About Ozempic, the Pill, and How Big Pharma Keeps You Sick

Polarizing people - if you want to pay $300 for more bloodwork or wear a CGM, I'm all for it. I track my steps and heartrate on my watch and I consume vegan protein powder.
All this.

And Casey Means was a few months away from finishing her ENT residency (which has nothing to do with nutritional health, btw) and then "left". The reality is that doesn't happen unless she wasn't going to be able to finish and her program doesn't sign off. That's a HUGE red flag. Greater than 99 % chance she didn't leave voluntarily.

Here's a reddit thread that discusses this a little bit.
It’s really interesting how often ENT, and other surgical subspecialists in training choose an alternative path. Never seems like self proclaimed health gurus start out as primary care providers.
Really interesting when you go through 4 years of college, 4 years of medical school, then 4 years of ENT residency doing 80+ hours/week, being on call, three separate Step exams, and 6 months away from finishing to complete that residency and deciding "nah, this isn't for me".

And given the fact that residency programs get dinged really hard if they don't graduate one of their residents, then it must have been pretty worrisome that they weren't going to be willing to sign off on her competency.
To be fair, I know an ENT doctor who completed training, but then decided to turn her practice into a Covid clinic.

But yes, a handful of these gurus saw the light jusssst before their arduous training was complete.
 
Interesting as it seems like this discussion is happening in other places as well.

From Calley Means. Former lobbyist. (And please don't turn this political as his sister, Stanford MD Dr. Casey Means was nominated for Surgeon General.)

My point is this conversation seems to be happening a lot.

I recently had a conversation with a friend who runs a clinic network of 1,000+ MDs.

She said the main conversation among doctors is frustration that patients are asking about the "root cause" and "more natural cures" for their conditions.

She said 0% of patients asked these questions five years ago, and now 80% of patients do.

Her doctors see this trend as a negative thing, and spend their time deriding the MAHA movement and social media personalities in the breakroom.

These clinics focus on dermatology and make money selling drugs and procedures. Many dermatological issues are tied to root cause issues (diet/lifestyle) and not a lack of cream or injection.

On Reddit boards, countless medical professionals are decrying these "root cause" questions.

I think this represents a major shift/dynamic happening in medicine that should be openly discussed. Are patients' right to be asking more questions about the root cause, or are the doctors right to be deriding Americans for taking health into their own hands? To be asking about food, exercise, over-medicalization, and lifestyle habits...

Should patients trust their doctors on chronic disease management? Can patients actually reverse their conditions and thrive if they explore the root cause? Are the answers simpler and more under our control than we believe?

I think the answer is clearly yes. I hope the trend of patients asking doctors for the root cause doesn't slow down, and it not only changes how we practice medicine, but also changes our culture to be more empowered.

If you have an acute condition that will kill you right away, see your doctor and listen to them. Our system is a miracle at addressing these acute issues. But that's less than 10% of our spending.

Our system's failure at chronic disease management has economic, national defense, and spiritual effects that are existential.

We need to have respect for our food and our soil. We need to cherish breastfeeding and natural food... We need to ensure kids are away from their phones and outside running around... We need to rejuvenate a grounding in the spiritual...

These are the messages our healthcare leaders should be repeating again and again - and that light is starting to shine through, despite aggressive resistance from hard-working doctors whose income and identity are undeniably tied to the broken status quo.
This post is 100% what I would expect Calley Means to post - he attacks traditional medicine and food and owns a company that pushes wellness products. Seems like a grift that has aircover with MAHA.
This is a serious question as i have no idea who Calley Means is, but what is wrong with what they said here?
Feels like attack the messenger when you can't attack the message.

Thought the article hit on the big point with root cause. Patients should want to know the root cause of their issues. And if a doctor doesn't want to explore that and explain it then the patient should be looking for a better doctor.

A lot of those "attacks" on traditional medicine and food are valid. There's a ton of unhealthy chemicals and junk in our food that the average person has no idea what is entering their body. Traditional medicine wants to push pills to fix everything instead of addressing root cause. I'm sure there's no financial incentives in the transaction between pharma reps visiting doctors and doctors overprescribing pills for everything if we are going to talk grifts.
Yeah, if people are happy with a bandaid approach that's fine. I see it all the time, gave an example with a family member earlier in this thread.

What i don't understand is the hostility towards wanting to find and fix the root cause of an illness through lifestyle modification (diet instead of statins if possible for instance).

As a general matter (I presume there are anecdotal examples), are doctors really hostile to lifestyle modification in their patients as a way to improve health?
Sorry, i meant referring to the initial post as a grift, which maybe it is, but i found what i read completely reasonable in a vacuum. I don't think most doctors are hostile to lifestyle modification, but i will add i believe some may think it's a waste of their time if they believe patients aren't willing.
Calley Means sells supplements, herbal remedies, and wellness products on his TrueMed platform. He had a vision in a sweat lodge of connecting RFK Jr. together with Trump.

Vanity Fair Article

He had a popular appearance on the Tucker Carlson podcast with his sister - Calley & Casey Means: The Truth About Ozempic, the Pill, and How Big Pharma Keeps You Sick

Polarizing people - if you want to pay $300 for more bloodwork or wear a CGM, I'm all for it. I track my steps and heartrate on my watch and I consume vegan protein powder.
All this.

And Casey Means was a few months away from finishing her ENT residency (which has nothing to do with nutritional health, btw) and then "left". The reality is that doesn't happen unless she wasn't going to be able to finish and her program doesn't sign off. That's a HUGE red flag. Greater than 99 % chance she didn't leave voluntarily.

Here's a reddit thread that discusses this a little bit.
It’s really interesting how often ENT, and other surgical subspecialists in training choose an alternative path. Never seems like self proclaimed health gurus start out as primary care providers.
Really interesting when you go through 4 years of college, 4 years of medical school, then 4 years of ENT residency doing 80+ hours/week, being on call, three separate Step exams, and 6 months away from finishing to complete that residency and deciding "nah, this isn't for me".

And given the fact that residency programs get dinged really hard if they don't graduate one of their residents, then it must have been pretty worrisome that they weren't going to be willing to sign off on her competency.
To be fair, I know an ENT doctor who completed training, but then decided to turn her practice into a Covid clinic.

But yes, a handful of these gurus saw the light jusssst before their arduous training was complete.
Right. Finish the 6 months (if they are letting you) then change course. No one leaves 6 months from the end "voluntarily" after all that.
 
I've gone against a doctor's advice twice in my life and both times it was for our kids.

The first was when our child's first pediatrician told us we should switch to skim milk for our son. He was nowhere near overweight and my wife had gotten into getting raw milk from a farm. We dug into it a bit and I understood that the doctor was doing her work to try and limit the obesity epidemic across the board, but we were being painted with a broad brush and felt it was a poor piece of advice for us as my wife is extremely health conscience and fed our son a very vegetable heavy, balanced and fresh food diet. We've stuck with whole milk to this day (raw got a little silly cost-wise so we stopped that after about 2 years).

The second was when we got our kids' vaccine lists and decided to skip the Rotavirus vaccine. I dug into all of them and what they did as my wife in a bit of an "anti-vax" group of women (I call them neo-hippies). The only one I felt wasn't really necessary was that one. Our pediatrician at the time was OK with it (different that the first one) and didn't really push back on it.
Did you do any research into the dangers of raw milk?
It’s a great example of the appeal to nature fallacy, as raw milk is demonstrably less safe than the pasteurized equivalent. Summary here
The growing popularity of unpasteurized milk in the United States raises public health concerns. We estimated outbreak-related illnesses and hospitalizations caused by the consumption of cow’s milk and cheese contaminated with Shiga toxin–producing Escherichia coli, Salmonella spp., Listeria monocytogenes, and Campylobacter spp. using a model relying on publicly available outbreak data. In the United States, outbreaks associated with dairy consumption cause, on average, 760 illnesses/year and 22 hospitalizations/year, mostly from Salmonella spp. and Campylobacter spp. Unpasteurized milk, consumed by only 3.2% of the population, and cheese, consumed by only 1.6% of the population, caused 96% of illnesses caused by contaminated dairy products. Unpasteurized dairy products thus cause 840 (95% CrI 611–1,158) times more illnesses and 45 (95% CrI 34–59) times more hospitalizations than pasteurized products. As consumption of unpasteurized dairy products grows, illnesses will increase steadily; a doubling in the consumption of unpasteurized milk or cheese could increase outbreak-related illnesses by 96%.
While you may have heard of E Coli and Salmonella, Listeria is the most concerning pathogen on that list. It’s extremely virulent, consistently responsible for most deaths caused by foodborne illness in this country.

I’m glad finance eventually trumped “natural” medicine, in this case, as it sounds like Jayrod and his wife were sidetracked by other concerns, which have a trivial impact on health.
 
I've gone against a doctor's advice twice in my life and both times it was for our kids.

The first was when our child's first pediatrician told us we should switch to skim milk for our son. He was nowhere near overweight and my wife had gotten into getting raw milk from a farm. We dug into it a bit and I understood that the doctor was doing her work to try and limit the obesity epidemic across the board, but we were being painted with a broad brush and felt it was a poor piece of advice for us as my wife is extremely health conscience and fed our son a very vegetable heavy, balanced and fresh food diet. We've stuck with whole milk to this day (raw got a little silly cost-wise so we stopped that after about 2 years).

The second was when we got our kids' vaccine lists and decided to skip the Rotavirus vaccine. I dug into all of them and what they did as my wife in a bit of an "anti-vax" group of women (I call them neo-hippies). The only one I felt wasn't really necessary was that one. Our pediatrician at the time was OK with it (different that the first one) and didn't really push back on it.
Did you do any research into the dangers of raw milk?

My research on raw milk was working on a dairy farm in High School.

The cows walked through the milking area and the automated hoses were attached to their udders. The dairymen all had spray hoses they'd use to wash the area off well before attaching the hoses. It was a farm, but felt like a pretty sanitary environment. The milk goes from the cow through the hoses and ends up in the giant stainless steel holding tanks.

Every few days, the trucks from the milk processor would come by and take the milk from the storage tank and transfer it into the truck they'd take to the milk processor plant.

And no matter how clean we kept things, when they emptied the milk storage holding tank, my job was to go in there and scoop out the 5 gallons or so of cow manure that would invariably have been mixed in with the milk and settled at the bottom of the tank.

So no thanks on Raw Milk.
Yikes. The thing is, even if no manure scooping were necessary, microscopic organisms can’t be seen by the naked eye. So we should rely on science to tell us when the bacterial burden is unsafe.
 

My research on raw milk was working on a dairy farm in High School.

The cows walked through the milking area and the automated hoses were attached to their udders. The dairymen all had spray hoses they'd use to wash the area off well before attaching the hoses. It was a farm, but felt like a pretty sanitary environment. The milk goes from the cow through the hoses and ends up in the giant stainless steel holding tanks.

Every few days, the trucks from the milk processor would come by and take the milk from the storage tank and transfer it into the truck they'd take to the milk processor plant.

And no matter how clean we kept things, when they emptied the milk storage holding tank, my job was go in there and scoop out the 5 gallons or so of cow manure that would invariably have been mixed in with the milk and settled at the bottom of the tank.

So no thanks on Raw Milk.
I've known people who stopped eating chicken after touring a chicken plant.
It would probably benefit all of us to tour the plants involved in industrial food production.

It might scare a few people’s diets “straight”.
 
Interesting as it seems like this discussion is happening in other places as well.

From Calley Means. Former lobbyist. (And please don't turn this political as his sister, Stanford MD Dr. Casey Means was nominated for Surgeon General.)

My point is this conversation seems to be happening a lot.

I recently had a conversation with a friend who runs a clinic network of 1,000+ MDs.

She said the main conversation among doctors is frustration that patients are asking about the "root cause" and "more natural cures" for their conditions.

She said 0% of patients asked these questions five years ago, and now 80% of patients do.

Her doctors see this trend as a negative thing, and spend their time deriding the MAHA movement and social media personalities in the breakroom.

These clinics focus on dermatology and make money selling drugs and procedures. Many dermatological issues are tied to root cause issues (diet/lifestyle) and not a lack of cream or injection.

On Reddit boards, countless medical professionals are decrying these "root cause" questions.

I think this represents a major shift/dynamic happening in medicine that should be openly discussed. Are patients' right to be asking more questions about the root cause, or are the doctors right to be deriding Americans for taking health into their own hands? To be asking about food, exercise, over-medicalization, and lifestyle habits...

Should patients trust their doctors on chronic disease management? Can patients actually reverse their conditions and thrive if they explore the root cause? Are the answers simpler and more under our control than we believe?

I think the answer is clearly yes. I hope the trend of patients asking doctors for the root cause doesn't slow down, and it not only changes how we practice medicine, but also changes our culture to be more empowered.

If you have an acute condition that will kill you right away, see your doctor and listen to them. Our system is a miracle at addressing these acute issues. But that's less than 10% of our spending.

Our system's failure at chronic disease management has economic, national defense, and spiritual effects that are existential.

We need to have respect for our food and our soil. We need to cherish breastfeeding and natural food... We need to ensure kids are away from their phones and outside running around... We need to rejuvenate a grounding in the spiritual...

These are the messages our healthcare leaders should be repeating again and again - and that light is starting to shine through, despite aggressive resistance from hard-working doctors whose income and identity are undeniably tied to the broken status quo.
Very interesting that this is becoming a bigger topic. Part of me is glad to see this — information is a good thing, self advocacy is a good thing, wanting to take care of your own health is a good thing.

Part of me is saddened because — let’s be honest here — this trend accelerated massively due to vaccine mandates. We were already headed that way with stupid people like my cousin believing that vaccines cause autism because Jenny McCarthy told her it was true. This is bat **** crazy of course, but unfortunately it is the darker side of self advocacy. And it is, IMHO, the OPs original intent when talking about the phrase “do your own research.” It really means “I have the answer already, from my next door neighbor Gladys, and I’m not leaving the doctor’s office satisfied until he/she agrees with the expert opinion of Gladys, who did the research herself.”

On the flip side, I’ve had direct personal experience with doctors not knowing the answers, but not admitting that they don’t know. And not showing any urgency to find the answers. My FIL has Parkinson’s, probably dementia too. But we don’t know, because nobody knows for sure what his diagnosis is. 2-3 GPs and multiple specialists have arrived at varying answers over the past SIX TO SEVEN YEARS.

Now before all the FBGs doctors jump in here to slam me, my BIL is a rheumatologist. Two of the experts we’ve seen are in his large teaching hospital. We’ve had the same possible diagnosis 3 times in 7 years — ruled out multiple times because “one small item simply doesn’t fit.” Only to circle back to that same diagnosis for each doctor that sees him. Why? 🤷‍♂️

My BIL thinks this is all normal. Even though he admits that it isn’t. He’s unwilling to question or challenge anything the other doctors say, even when they say illogical things. We treat doctors like gods, but they are simply just people. Really knowledgeable and well trained people. Usually very well intentioned people.

But they are humans. They all have strengths and weaknesses. They (mostly) have confirmation bias just like (most) other human beings. And bluntly, not all of them are that smart, and not all of them are able to handle tough logic puzzles — but for a specialist, that’s actually their job much of the time!

So yeah — I “do my own research” sometimes. And I ask questions. And poke. And prod. And make doctors mildly uncomfortable at times.

But I also know I’m not the expert. Not the doctor. I’m an advocate for myself and my family. And also at the core more logical and problem-solving adept than 95+% of doctors. ;)
Good post. A doctor’s word isn’t the word of god. They should show humility, and embrace shared decision making. Medicine is a huge field, with many unanswered questions, so there’s no shame in admitting you don’t know it all.

You very well may be better at problem-solving than 95% of physicians. Still, you may need to embrace humility as well, as intelligence doesn’t supplant knowledge, or experience.

And how should a physician handle a deluge of questions, root cause analysis, and alternative medicine discussions with patients who aren’t so preternaturally gifted?
I’m not anywhere close to the subject matter expert on medical topics, and unlike my crazy cousin, I don’t pretend to be. I’m deeply appreciative of people who spend time becoming medical experts.

Handling a deluge of questions etc with folks who are dumb like my cousin? I don’t know. Honestly. It’s gotta be really hard to do. Wait — I have to do that every day at my job too, it just happens to be in a boring field like insurance! ;)

Seriously, none of this stuff is easy, and none of it is one-size-fits-all. Which is really tough to implement now in the new paradigm of health care run by dumb bureaucrats who don’t understand medicine.
 
Interesting as it seems like this discussion is happening in other places as well.

From Calley Means. Former lobbyist. (And please don't turn this political as his sister, Stanford MD Dr. Casey Means was nominated for Surgeon General.)

My point is this conversation seems to be happening a lot.

I recently had a conversation with a friend who runs a clinic network of 1,000+ MDs.

She said the main conversation among doctors is frustration that patients are asking about the "root cause" and "more natural cures" for their conditions.

She said 0% of patients asked these questions five years ago, and now 80% of patients do.

Her doctors see this trend as a negative thing, and spend their time deriding the MAHA movement and social media personalities in the breakroom.

These clinics focus on dermatology and make money selling drugs and procedures. Many dermatological issues are tied to root cause issues (diet/lifestyle) and not a lack of cream or injection.

On Reddit boards, countless medical professionals are decrying these "root cause" questions.

I think this represents a major shift/dynamic happening in medicine that should be openly discussed. Are patients' right to be asking more questions about the root cause, or are the doctors right to be deriding Americans for taking health into their own hands? To be asking about food, exercise, over-medicalization, and lifestyle habits...

Should patients trust their doctors on chronic disease management? Can patients actually reverse their conditions and thrive if they explore the root cause? Are the answers simpler and more under our control than we believe?

I think the answer is clearly yes. I hope the trend of patients asking doctors for the root cause doesn't slow down, and it not only changes how we practice medicine, but also changes our culture to be more empowered.

If you have an acute condition that will kill you right away, see your doctor and listen to them. Our system is a miracle at addressing these acute issues. But that's less than 10% of our spending.

Our system's failure at chronic disease management has economic, national defense, and spiritual effects that are existential.

We need to have respect for our food and our soil. We need to cherish breastfeeding and natural food... We need to ensure kids are away from their phones and outside running around... We need to rejuvenate a grounding in the spiritual...

These are the messages our healthcare leaders should be repeating again and again - and that light is starting to shine through, despite aggressive resistance from hard-working doctors whose income and identity are undeniably tied to the broken status quo.
Very interesting that this is becoming a bigger topic. Part of me is glad to see this — information is a good thing, self advocacy is a good thing, wanting to take care of your own health is a good thing.

Part of me is saddened because — let’s be honest here — this trend accelerated massively due to vaccine mandates. We were already headed that way with stupid people like my cousin believing that vaccines cause autism because Jenny McCarthy told her it was true. This is bat **** crazy of course, but unfortunately it is the darker side of self advocacy. And it is, IMHO, the OPs original intent when talking about the phrase “do your own research.” It really means “I have the answer already, from my next door neighbor Gladys, and I’m not leaving the doctor’s office satisfied until he/she agrees with the expert opinion of Gladys, who did the research herself.”

On the flip side, I’ve had direct personal experience with doctors not knowing the answers, but not admitting that they don’t know. And not showing any urgency to find the answers. My FIL has Parkinson’s, probably dementia too. But we don’t know, because nobody knows for sure what his diagnosis is. 2-3 GPs and multiple specialists have arrived at varying answers over the past SIX TO SEVEN YEARS.

Now before all the FBGs doctors jump in here to slam me, my BIL is a rheumatologist. Two of the experts we’ve seen are in his large teaching hospital. We’ve had the same possible diagnosis 3 times in 7 years — ruled out multiple times because “one small item simply doesn’t fit.” Only to circle back to that same diagnosis for each doctor that sees him. Why? 🤷‍♂️

My BIL thinks this is all normal. Even though he admits that it isn’t. He’s unwilling to question or challenge anything the other doctors say, even when they say illogical things. We treat doctors like gods, but they are simply just people. Really knowledgeable and well trained people. Usually very well intentioned people.

But they are humans. They all have strengths and weaknesses. They (mostly) have confirmation bias just like (most) other human beings. And bluntly, not all of them are that smart, and not all of them are able to handle tough logic puzzles — but for a specialist, that’s actually their job much of the time!

So yeah — I “do my own research” sometimes. And I ask questions. And poke. And prod. And make doctors mildly uncomfortable at times.

But I also know I’m not the expert. Not the doctor. I’m an advocate for myself and my family. And also at the core more logical and problem-solving adept than 95+% of doctors. ;)
Good post. A doctor’s word isn’t the word of god. They should show humility, and embrace shared decision making. Medicine is a huge field, with many unanswered questions, so there’s no shame in admitting you don’t know it all.

You very well may be better at problem-solving than 95% of physicians. Still, you may need to embrace humility as well, as intelligence doesn’t supplant knowledge, or experience.

And how should a physician handle a deluge of questions, root cause analysis, and alternative medicine discussions with patients who aren’t so preternaturally gifted?
I’m not anywhere close to the subject matter expert on medical topics, and unlike my crazy cousin, I don’t pretend to be. I’m deeply appreciative of people who spend time becoming medical experts.

Handling a deluge of questions etc with folks who are dumb like my cousin? I don’t know. Honestly. It’s gotta be really hard to do. Wait — I have to do that every day at my job too, it just happens to be in a boring field like insurance! ;)

Seriously, none of this stuff is easy, and none of it is one-size-fits-all. Which is really tough to implement now in the new paradigm of health care run by dumb bureaucrats who don’t understand medicine.
Do you think insurance is as complex, or as contentious as medicine? What about nutrition?

How many alt insurance videos on YouTube/podcasts exist?

FWIW, I believe I’m more logical, and better at problem-solving than 95% of insurance salespeople.
 
Interesting as it seems like this discussion is happening in other places as well.

From Calley Means. Former lobbyist. (And please don't turn this political as his sister, Stanford MD Dr. Casey Means was nominated for Surgeon General.)

My point is this conversation seems to be happening a lot.

I recently had a conversation with a friend who runs a clinic network of 1,000+ MDs.

She said the main conversation among doctors is frustration that patients are asking about the "root cause" and "more natural cures" for their conditions.

She said 0% of patients asked these questions five years ago, and now 80% of patients do.

Her doctors see this trend as a negative thing, and spend their time deriding the MAHA movement and social media personalities in the breakroom.

These clinics focus on dermatology and make money selling drugs and procedures. Many dermatological issues are tied to root cause issues (diet/lifestyle) and not a lack of cream or injection.

On Reddit boards, countless medical professionals are decrying these "root cause" questions.

I think this represents a major shift/dynamic happening in medicine that should be openly discussed. Are patients' right to be asking more questions about the root cause, or are the doctors right to be deriding Americans for taking health into their own hands? To be asking about food, exercise, over-medicalization, and lifestyle habits...

Should patients trust their doctors on chronic disease management? Can patients actually reverse their conditions and thrive if they explore the root cause? Are the answers simpler and more under our control than we believe?

I think the answer is clearly yes. I hope the trend of patients asking doctors for the root cause doesn't slow down, and it not only changes how we practice medicine, but also changes our culture to be more empowered.

If you have an acute condition that will kill you right away, see your doctor and listen to them. Our system is a miracle at addressing these acute issues. But that's less than 10% of our spending.

Our system's failure at chronic disease management has economic, national defense, and spiritual effects that are existential.

We need to have respect for our food and our soil. We need to cherish breastfeeding and natural food... We need to ensure kids are away from their phones and outside running around... We need to rejuvenate a grounding in the spiritual...

These are the messages our healthcare leaders should be repeating again and again - and that light is starting to shine through, despite aggressive resistance from hard-working doctors whose income and identity are undeniably tied to the broken status quo.
Very interesting that this is becoming a bigger topic. Part of me is glad to see this — information is a good thing, self advocacy is a good thing, wanting to take care of your own health is a good thing.

Part of me is saddened because — let’s be honest here — this trend accelerated massively due to vaccine mandates. We were already headed that way with stupid people like my cousin believing that vaccines cause autism because Jenny McCarthy told her it was true. This is bat **** crazy of course, but unfortunately it is the darker side of self advocacy. And it is, IMHO, the OPs original intent when talking about the phrase “do your own research.” It really means “I have the answer already, from my next door neighbor Gladys, and I’m not leaving the doctor’s office satisfied until he/she agrees with the expert opinion of Gladys, who did the research herself.”

On the flip side, I’ve had direct personal experience with doctors not knowing the answers, but not admitting that they don’t know. And not showing any urgency to find the answers. My FIL has Parkinson’s, probably dementia too. But we don’t know, because nobody knows for sure what his diagnosis is. 2-3 GPs and multiple specialists have arrived at varying answers over the past SIX TO SEVEN YEARS.

Now before all the FBGs doctors jump in here to slam me, my BIL is a rheumatologist. Two of the experts we’ve seen are in his large teaching hospital. We’ve had the same possible diagnosis 3 times in 7 years — ruled out multiple times because “one small item simply doesn’t fit.” Only to circle back to that same diagnosis for each doctor that sees him. Why? 🤷‍♂️

My BIL thinks this is all normal. Even though he admits that it isn’t. He’s unwilling to question or challenge anything the other doctors say, even when they say illogical things. We treat doctors like gods, but they are simply just people. Really knowledgeable and well trained people. Usually very well intentioned people.

But they are humans. They all have strengths and weaknesses. They (mostly) have confirmation bias just like (most) other human beings. And bluntly, not all of them are that smart, and not all of them are able to handle tough logic puzzles — but for a specialist, that’s actually their job much of the time!

So yeah — I “do my own research” sometimes. And I ask questions. And poke. And prod. And make doctors mildly uncomfortable at times.

But I also know I’m not the expert. Not the doctor. I’m an advocate for myself and my family. And also at the core more logical and problem-solving adept than 95+% of doctors. ;)
Good post. A doctor’s word isn’t the word of god. They should show humility, and embrace shared decision making. Medicine is a huge field, with many unanswered questions, so there’s no shame in admitting you don’t know it all.

You very well may be better at problem-solving than 95% of physicians. Still, you may need to embrace humility as well, as intelligence doesn’t supplant knowledge, or experience.

And how should a physician handle a deluge of questions, root cause analysis, and alternative medicine discussions with patients who aren’t so preternaturally gifted?
I’m not anywhere close to the subject matter expert on medical topics, and unlike my crazy cousin, I don’t pretend to be. I’m deeply appreciative of people who spend time becoming medical experts.

Handling a deluge of questions etc with folks who are dumb like my cousin? I don’t know. Honestly. It’s gotta be really hard to do. Wait — I have to do that every day at my job too, it just happens to be in a boring field like insurance! ;)

Seriously, none of this stuff is easy, and none of it is one-size-fits-all. Which is really tough to implement now in the new paradigm of health care run by dumb bureaucrats who don’t understand medicine.
Do you think insurance is as complex, or as contentious as medicine? What about nutrition?

How many alt insurance videos on YouTube/podcasts exist?

FWIW, I believe I’m more logical, and better at problem-solving than 95% of insurance salespeople.
1. No idea. Many things are very complex, and I don’t pretend to be an expert at many of them.

2. No clue and it isn’t relevant. But to play along, most people *just know* that they are getting screwed by their insurance company.

3. You are probably more logical and a better problem solver than 95% of people in any industry.

4. I’m not an insurance salesperson. But many of them are idiots, in my experience. (no offense to anyone in here who sells insurance)
 
Perhaps most importantly, how does financial stake in the book Good Energy influence Calley Means’ stance?

As I said above, I think it's always good to consider incentives. For all sides. As I said way back about the medical industry as well. I think that's fair.

For Means, I don't know how his financial interests in his book influence his stance. I'd hope he believes what he said in the book and his post is aligned with what he's saying.
After I posted, I see others have it covered.

What do you think about the book’s description? Do you believe the statements are evidence-based?
What if depression, anxiety, infertility, insomnia, heart disease, erectile dysfunction, type 2 diabetes, Alzheimer’s dementia, cancer and many other health conditions that torture and shorten our lives actually have the same root cause?

The truth is, they do. And our ability to prevent and reverse these conditions - and feel incredible NOW - is under our control and simpler than we think. The key is our metabolic function: the way we make energy in our cells and bodies. The ability to make GOOD ENERGY in our bodies is the most important and least understood factor in our overall health, and the biggest blindspot in healthcare.

I don't know enough about the book to know if those statements are evidence based.
 
Interesting as it seems like this discussion is happening in other places as well.

From Calley Means. Former lobbyist. (And please don't turn this political as his sister, Stanford MD Dr. Casey Means was nominated for Surgeon General.)

My point is this conversation seems to be happening a lot.

I recently had a conversation with a friend who runs a clinic network of 1,000+ MDs.

She said the main conversation among doctors is frustration that patients are asking about the "root cause" and "more natural cures" for their conditions.

She said 0% of patients asked these questions five years ago, and now 80% of patients do.

Her doctors see this trend as a negative thing, and spend their time deriding the MAHA movement and social media personalities in the breakroom.

These clinics focus on dermatology and make money selling drugs and procedures. Many dermatological issues are tied to root cause issues (diet/lifestyle) and not a lack of cream or injection.

On Reddit boards, countless medical professionals are decrying these "root cause" questions.

I think this represents a major shift/dynamic happening in medicine that should be openly discussed. Are patients' right to be asking more questions about the root cause, or are the doctors right to be deriding Americans for taking health into their own hands? To be asking about food, exercise, over-medicalization, and lifestyle habits...

Should patients trust their doctors on chronic disease management? Can patients actually reverse their conditions and thrive if they explore the root cause? Are the answers simpler and more under our control than we believe?

I think the answer is clearly yes. I hope the trend of patients asking doctors for the root cause doesn't slow down, and it not only changes how we practice medicine, but also changes our culture to be more empowered.

If you have an acute condition that will kill you right away, see your doctor and listen to them. Our system is a miracle at addressing these acute issues. But that's less than 10% of our spending.

Our system's failure at chronic disease management has economic, national defense, and spiritual effects that are existential.

We need to have respect for our food and our soil. We need to cherish breastfeeding and natural food... We need to ensure kids are away from their phones and outside running around... We need to rejuvenate a grounding in the spiritual...

These are the messages our healthcare leaders should be repeating again and again - and that light is starting to shine through, despite aggressive resistance from hard-working doctors whose income and identity are undeniably tied to the broken status quo.
This post is 100% what I would expect Calley Means to post - he attacks traditional medicine and food and owns a company that pushes wellness products. Seems like a grift that has aircover with MAHA.
This is a serious question as i have no idea who Calley Means is, but what is wrong with what they said here?
Feels like attack the messenger when you can't attack the message.

Thought the article hit on the big point with root cause. Patients should want to know the root cause of their issues. And if a doctor doesn't want to explore that and explain it then the patient should be looking for a better doctor.

A lot of those "attacks" on traditional medicine and food are valid. There's a ton of unhealthy chemicals and junk in our food that the average person has no idea what is entering their body. Traditional medicine wants to push pills to fix everything instead of addressing root cause. I'm sure there's no financial incentives in the transaction between pharma reps visiting doctors and doctors overprescribing pills for everything if we are going to talk grifts.
Yeah, if people are happy with a bandaid approach that's fine. I see it all the time, gave an example with a family member earlier in this thread.

What i don't understand is the hostility towards wanting to find and fix the root cause of an illness through lifestyle modification (diet instead of statins if possible for instance).

As a general matter (I presume there are anecdotal examples), are doctors really hostile to lifestyle modification in their patients as a way to improve health?
Sorry, i meant referring to the initial post as a grift, which maybe it is, but i found what i read completely reasonable in a vacuum. I don't think most doctors are hostile to lifestyle modification, but i will add i believe some may think it's a waste of their time if they believe patients aren't willing.
Calley Means sells supplements, herbal remedies, and wellness products on his TrueMed platform. He had a vision in a sweat lodge of connecting RFK Jr. together with Trump.

Vanity Fair Article

He had a popular appearance on the Tucker Carlson podcast with his sister - Calley & Casey Means: The Truth About Ozempic, the Pill, and How Big Pharma Keeps You Sick

Polarizing people - if you want to pay $300 for more bloodwork or wear a CGM, I'm all for it. I track my steps and heartrate on my watch and I consume vegan protein powder.
All this.

And Casey Means was a few months away from finishing her ENT residency (which has nothing to do with nutritional health, btw) and then "left". The reality is that doesn't happen unless she wasn't going to be able to finish and her program doesn't sign off. That's a HUGE red flag. Greater than 99 % chance she didn't leave voluntarily.

Here's a reddit thread that discusses this a little bit.

All this.

And Casey Means was a few months away from finishing her ENT residency (which has nothing to do with nutritional health, btw) and then "left". The reality is that doesn't happen unless she wasn't going to be able to finish and her program doesn't sign off. That's a HUGE red flag. Greater than 99 % chance she didn't leave voluntarily.

Here's a reddit thread that discusses this a little bit.
It’s really interesting how often ENT, and other surgical subspecialists in training choose an alternative path. Never seems like self proclaimed health gurus start out as primary care providers.
Really interesting when you go through 4 years of college, 4 years of medical school, then 4 years of ENT residency doing 80+ hours/week, being on call, three separate Step exams, and 6 months away from finishing to complete that residency and deciding "nah, this isn't for me".

And given the fact that residency programs get dinged really hard if they don't graduate one of their residents, then it must have been pretty worrisome that they weren't going to be willing to sign off on her competency.

Seems like an odd flex to try and denigrate a Stanford MD with the "left" and "HUGE" red flag, Or to speculate about her competency?

That she's just a regular Stanford MD and not a Stanford ENT surgeon is somehow relevant to the topic of her brother?

Are just regular MD's worth listening to?
 
Interesting as it seems like this discussion is happening in other places as well.

From Calley Means. Former lobbyist. (And please don't turn this political as his sister, Stanford MD Dr. Casey Means was nominated for Surgeon General.)

My point is this conversation seems to be happening a lot.

I recently had a conversation with a friend who runs a clinic network of 1,000+ MDs.

She said the main conversation among doctors is frustration that patients are asking about the "root cause" and "more natural cures" for their conditions.

She said 0% of patients asked these questions five years ago, and now 80% of patients do.

Her doctors see this trend as a negative thing, and spend their time deriding the MAHA movement and social media personalities in the breakroom.

These clinics focus on dermatology and make money selling drugs and procedures. Many dermatological issues are tied to root cause issues (diet/lifestyle) and not a lack of cream or injection.

On Reddit boards, countless medical professionals are decrying these "root cause" questions.

I think this represents a major shift/dynamic happening in medicine that should be openly discussed. Are patients' right to be asking more questions about the root cause, or are the doctors right to be deriding Americans for taking health into their own hands? To be asking about food, exercise, over-medicalization, and lifestyle habits...

Should patients trust their doctors on chronic disease management? Can patients actually reverse their conditions and thrive if they explore the root cause? Are the answers simpler and more under our control than we believe?

I think the answer is clearly yes. I hope the trend of patients asking doctors for the root cause doesn't slow down, and it not only changes how we practice medicine, but also changes our culture to be more empowered.

If you have an acute condition that will kill you right away, see your doctor and listen to them. Our system is a miracle at addressing these acute issues. But that's less than 10% of our spending.

Our system's failure at chronic disease management has economic, national defense, and spiritual effects that are existential.

We need to have respect for our food and our soil. We need to cherish breastfeeding and natural food... We need to ensure kids are away from their phones and outside running around... We need to rejuvenate a grounding in the spiritual...

These are the messages our healthcare leaders should be repeating again and again - and that light is starting to shine through, despite aggressive resistance from hard-working doctors whose income and identity are undeniably tied to the broken status quo.
This post is 100% what I would expect Calley Means to post - he attacks traditional medicine and food and owns a company that pushes wellness products. Seems like a grift that has aircover with MAHA.
This is a serious question as i have no idea who Calley Means is, but what is wrong with what they said here?
Feels like attack the messenger when you can't attack the message.

Thought the article hit on the big point with root cause. Patients should want to know the root cause of their issues. And if a doctor doesn't want to explore that and explain it then the patient should be looking for a better doctor.

A lot of those "attacks" on traditional medicine and food are valid. There's a ton of unhealthy chemicals and junk in our food that the average person has no idea what is entering their body. Traditional medicine wants to push pills to fix everything instead of addressing root cause. I'm sure there's no financial incentives in the transaction between pharma reps visiting doctors and doctors overprescribing pills for everything if we are going to talk grifts.
Yeah, if people are happy with a bandaid approach that's fine. I see it all the time, gave an example with a family member earlier in this thread.

What i don't understand is the hostility towards wanting to find and fix the root cause of an illness through lifestyle modification (diet instead of statins if possible for instance).

As a general matter (I presume there are anecdotal examples), are doctors really hostile to lifestyle modification in their patients as a way to improve health?
Sorry, i meant referring to the initial post as a grift, which maybe it is, but i found what i read completely reasonable in a vacuum. I don't think most doctors are hostile to lifestyle modification, but i will add i believe some may think it's a waste of their time if they believe patients aren't willing.
Calley Means sells supplements, herbal remedies, and wellness products on his TrueMed platform. He had a vision in a sweat lodge of connecting RFK Jr. together with Trump.

Vanity Fair Article

He had a popular appearance on the Tucker Carlson podcast with his sister - Calley & Casey Means: The Truth About Ozempic, the Pill, and How Big Pharma Keeps You Sick

Polarizing people - if you want to pay $300 for more bloodwork or wear a CGM, I'm all for it. I track my steps and heartrate on my watch and I consume vegan protein powder.
All this.

And Casey Means was a few months away from finishing her ENT residency (which has nothing to do with nutritional health, btw) and then "left". The reality is that doesn't happen unless she wasn't going to be able to finish and her program doesn't sign off. That's a HUGE red flag. Greater than 99 % chance she didn't leave voluntarily.

Here's a reddit thread that discusses this a little bit.

All this.

And Casey Means was a few months away from finishing her ENT residency (which has nothing to do with nutritional health, btw) and then "left". The reality is that doesn't happen unless she wasn't going to be able to finish and her program doesn't sign off. That's a HUGE red flag. Greater than 99 % chance she didn't leave voluntarily.

Here's a reddit thread that discusses this a little bit.
It’s really interesting how often ENT, and other surgical subspecialists in training choose an alternative path. Never seems like self proclaimed health gurus start out as primary care providers.
Really interesting when you go through 4 years of college, 4 years of medical school, then 4 years of ENT residency doing 80+ hours/week, being on call, three separate Step exams, and 6 months away from finishing to complete that residency and deciding "nah, this isn't for me".

And given the fact that residency programs get dinged really hard if they don't graduate one of their residents, then it must have been pretty worrisome that they weren't going to be willing to sign off on her competency.

Seems like an odd flex to try and denigrate a Stanford MD with the "left" and "HUGE" red flag, Or to speculate about her competency?

That she's just a regular Stanford MD and not a Stanford ENT surgeon is somehow relevant to the topic of her brother?

Are just regular MD's worth listening to?
It's not a "flex".

Ask your best friend buddy MD what he thinks about someone "voluntarily" leaving 6 months before finishing a 4 year surgical residency.

It would only seem an "odd flex" to you if you don't understand how residency works and how often (i.e. never) someone quits right before they are about to finish.

That only happens when a program asks them to resign before they are essentially fired or let go. And that rarely happens by itself because programs will do just about anything to help a resident complete residency, including repeating a year. And programs get dinged really hard by ACGME if a candidate doesn't complete their residency as a result of the program not signing off at the end.

Or read the reddit thread I linked earlier that has many others saying the same thing (which I completely agree with).

Or it's just some odd flex. Whatever.

And it's related to her brother because, well, they are in the same business together using her degree to promote their business. Doesn't take a big leap to figure out why it's mentioned together.
 
Interesting as it seems like this discussion is happening in other places as well.

From Calley Means. Former lobbyist. (And please don't turn this political as his sister, Stanford MD Dr. Casey Means was nominated for Surgeon General.)

My point is this conversation seems to be happening a lot.

I recently had a conversation with a friend who runs a clinic network of 1,000+ MDs.

She said the main conversation among doctors is frustration that patients are asking about the "root cause" and "more natural cures" for their conditions.

She said 0% of patients asked these questions five years ago, and now 80% of patients do.

Her doctors see this trend as a negative thing, and spend their time deriding the MAHA movement and social media personalities in the breakroom.

These clinics focus on dermatology and make money selling drugs and procedures. Many dermatological issues are tied to root cause issues (diet/lifestyle) and not a lack of cream or injection.

On Reddit boards, countless medical professionals are decrying these "root cause" questions.

I think this represents a major shift/dynamic happening in medicine that should be openly discussed. Are patients' right to be asking more questions about the root cause, or are the doctors right to be deriding Americans for taking health into their own hands? To be asking about food, exercise, over-medicalization, and lifestyle habits...

Should patients trust their doctors on chronic disease management? Can patients actually reverse their conditions and thrive if they explore the root cause? Are the answers simpler and more under our control than we believe?

I think the answer is clearly yes. I hope the trend of patients asking doctors for the root cause doesn't slow down, and it not only changes how we practice medicine, but also changes our culture to be more empowered.

If you have an acute condition that will kill you right away, see your doctor and listen to them. Our system is a miracle at addressing these acute issues. But that's less than 10% of our spending.

Our system's failure at chronic disease management has economic, national defense, and spiritual effects that are existential.

We need to have respect for our food and our soil. We need to cherish breastfeeding and natural food... We need to ensure kids are away from their phones and outside running around... We need to rejuvenate a grounding in the spiritual...

These are the messages our healthcare leaders should be repeating again and again - and that light is starting to shine through, despite aggressive resistance from hard-working doctors whose income and identity are undeniably tied to the broken status quo.
This post is 100% what I would expect Calley Means to post - he attacks traditional medicine and food and owns a company that pushes wellness products. Seems like a grift that has aircover with MAHA.
This is a serious question as i have no idea who Calley Means is, but what is wrong with what they said here?
Feels like attack the messenger when you can't attack the message.

Thought the article hit on the big point with root cause. Patients should want to know the root cause of their issues. And if a doctor doesn't want to explore that and explain it then the patient should be looking for a better doctor.

A lot of those "attacks" on traditional medicine and food are valid. There's a ton of unhealthy chemicals and junk in our food that the average person has no idea what is entering their body. Traditional medicine wants to push pills to fix everything instead of addressing root cause. I'm sure there's no financial incentives in the transaction between pharma reps visiting doctors and doctors overprescribing pills for everything if we are going to talk grifts.
Yeah, if people are happy with a bandaid approach that's fine. I see it all the time, gave an example with a family member earlier in this thread.

What i don't understand is the hostility towards wanting to find and fix the root cause of an illness through lifestyle modification (diet instead of statins if possible for instance).

As a general matter (I presume there are anecdotal examples), are doctors really hostile to lifestyle modification in their patients as a way to improve health?
Sorry, i meant referring to the initial post as a grift, which maybe it is, but i found what i read completely reasonable in a vacuum. I don't think most doctors are hostile to lifestyle modification, but i will add i believe some may think it's a waste of their time if they believe patients aren't willing.
Calley Means sells supplements, herbal remedies, and wellness products on his TrueMed platform. He had a vision in a sweat lodge of connecting RFK Jr. together with Trump.

Vanity Fair Article

He had a popular appearance on the Tucker Carlson podcast with his sister - Calley & Casey Means: The Truth About Ozempic, the Pill, and How Big Pharma Keeps You Sick

Polarizing people - if you want to pay $300 for more bloodwork or wear a CGM, I'm all for it. I track my steps and heartrate on my watch and I consume vegan protein powder.
All this.

And Casey Means was a few months away from finishing her ENT residency (which has nothing to do with nutritional health, btw) and then "left". The reality is that doesn't happen unless she wasn't going to be able to finish and her program doesn't sign off. That's a HUGE red flag. Greater than 99 % chance she didn't leave voluntarily.

Here's a reddit thread that discusses this a little bit.

All this.

And Casey Means was a few months away from finishing her ENT residency (which has nothing to do with nutritional health, btw) and then "left". The reality is that doesn't happen unless she wasn't going to be able to finish and her program doesn't sign off. That's a HUGE red flag. Greater than 99 % chance she didn't leave voluntarily.

Here's a reddit thread that discusses this a little bit.
It’s really interesting how often ENT, and other surgical subspecialists in training choose an alternative path. Never seems like self proclaimed health gurus start out as primary care providers.
Really interesting when you go through 4 years of college, 4 years of medical school, then 4 years of ENT residency doing 80+ hours/week, being on call, three separate Step exams, and 6 months away from finishing to complete that residency and deciding "nah, this isn't for me".

And given the fact that residency programs get dinged really hard if they don't graduate one of their residents, then it must have been pretty worrisome that they weren't going to be willing to sign off on her competency.

Seems like an odd flex to try and denigrate a Stanford MD with the "left" and "HUGE" red flag, Or to speculate about her competency?

That she's just a regular Stanford MD and not a Stanford ENT surgeon is somehow relevant to the topic of her brother?

Are just regular MD's worth listening to?
It's not a "flex".

Ask your best friend buddy MD what he thinks about someone "voluntarily" leaving 6 months before finishing a 4 year surgical residency.

It would only seem an "odd flex" to you if you don't understand how residency works and how often (i.e. never) someone quits right before they are about to finish.

That only happens when a program asks them to resign before they are essentially fired or let go. And that rarely happens by itself because programs will do just about anything to help a resident complete residency, including repeating a year. And programs get dinged really hard by ACGME if a candidate doesn't complete their residency as a result of the program not signing off at the end.

Or read the reddit thread I linked earlier that has many others saying the same thing (which I completely agree with).

Or it's just some odd flex. Whatever.

And it's related to her brother because, well, they are in the same business together using her degree to promote their business. Doesn't take a big leap to figure out why it's mentioned together.

Thanks.
 
I don't know enough about the book to know if those statements are evidence based.
But we all know that "metabolic function" does not cure or prevent anxiety, infertility, insomnia, heart disease, erectile dysfunction, type 2 diabetes, Alzheimer’s dementia, and cancer
Yep. It’s pretty obvious those statements, and others in that snippet are over the top…but that’s what people want to read. That’s their prerogative, of course.

But to refute such fluff with actual science is impossible, and probably a waste of time.
 
Interesting as it seems like this discussion is happening in other places as well.

From Calley Means. Former lobbyist. (And please don't turn this political as his sister, Stanford MD Dr. Casey Means was nominated for Surgeon General.)

My point is this conversation seems to be happening a lot.

I recently had a conversation with a friend who runs a clinic network of 1,000+ MDs.

She said the main conversation among doctors is frustration that patients are asking about the "root cause" and "more natural cures" for their conditions.

She said 0% of patients asked these questions five years ago, and now 80% of patients do.

Her doctors see this trend as a negative thing, and spend their time deriding the MAHA movement and social media personalities in the breakroom.

These clinics focus on dermatology and make money selling drugs and procedures. Many dermatological issues are tied to root cause issues (diet/lifestyle) and not a lack of cream or injection.

On Reddit boards, countless medical professionals are decrying these "root cause" questions.

I think this represents a major shift/dynamic happening in medicine that should be openly discussed. Are patients' right to be asking more questions about the root cause, or are the doctors right to be deriding Americans for taking health into their own hands? To be asking about food, exercise, over-medicalization, and lifestyle habits...

Should patients trust their doctors on chronic disease management? Can patients actually reverse their conditions and thrive if they explore the root cause? Are the answers simpler and more under our control than we believe?

I think the answer is clearly yes. I hope the trend of patients asking doctors for the root cause doesn't slow down, and it not only changes how we practice medicine, but also changes our culture to be more empowered.

If you have an acute condition that will kill you right away, see your doctor and listen to them. Our system is a miracle at addressing these acute issues. But that's less than 10% of our spending.

Our system's failure at chronic disease management has economic, national defense, and spiritual effects that are existential.

We need to have respect for our food and our soil. We need to cherish breastfeeding and natural food... We need to ensure kids are away from their phones and outside running around... We need to rejuvenate a grounding in the spiritual...

These are the messages our healthcare leaders should be repeating again and again - and that light is starting to shine through, despite aggressive resistance from hard-working doctors whose income and identity are undeniably tied to the broken status quo.
This post is 100% what I would expect Calley Means to post - he attacks traditional medicine and food and owns a company that pushes wellness products. Seems like a grift that has aircover with MAHA.
This is a serious question as i have no idea who Calley Means is, but what is wrong with what they said here?
Feels like attack the messenger when you can't attack the message.

Thought the article hit on the big point with root cause. Patients should want to know the root cause of their issues. And if a doctor doesn't want to explore that and explain it then the patient should be looking for a better doctor.

A lot of those "attacks" on traditional medicine and food are valid. There's a ton of unhealthy chemicals and junk in our food that the average person has no idea what is entering their body. Traditional medicine wants to push pills to fix everything instead of addressing root cause. I'm sure there's no financial incentives in the transaction between pharma reps visiting doctors and doctors overprescribing pills for everything if we are going to talk grifts.
Yeah, if people are happy with a bandaid approach that's fine. I see it all the time, gave an example with a family member earlier in this thread.

What i don't understand is the hostility towards wanting to find and fix the root cause of an illness through lifestyle modification (diet instead of statins if possible for instance).

As a general matter (I presume there are anecdotal examples), are doctors really hostile to lifestyle modification in their patients as a way to improve health?
Sorry, i meant referring to the initial post as a grift, which maybe it is, but i found what i read completely reasonable in a vacuum. I don't think most doctors are hostile to lifestyle modification, but i will add i believe some may think it's a waste of their time if they believe patients aren't willing.
Calley Means sells supplements, herbal remedies, and wellness products on his TrueMed platform. He had a vision in a sweat lodge of connecting RFK Jr. together with Trump.

Vanity Fair Article

He had a popular appearance on the Tucker Carlson podcast with his sister - Calley & Casey Means: The Truth About Ozempic, the Pill, and How Big Pharma Keeps You Sick

Polarizing people - if you want to pay $300 for more bloodwork or wear a CGM, I'm all for it. I track my steps and heartrate on my watch and I consume vegan protein powder.
That Vanity Fair article is really interesting, and a microcosm of how we’ve shifted trust from actual experts to influencers and media personalities.

People are so drawn to stories of corruption in our institutions - healthcare and academia, to name a couple, they ignore what drives the “whistleblowers”, and purveyors of alternative viewpoints.

It’s kinda disheartening how often links to contemporary topics lead to guys like this. Even worse, they’re now in positions which influence public policy.

I’m not saying academic medicine is perfect, mind you. Clearly it isn’t. But I don’t think nebulous appeals to “good energy”, while peddling unnecessary testing and supplements is the answer either.

This quote from VF sums it up:
“It’s an entity in which the branding has outstripped the content,” “There is a slogan and a certain amount of grift.”
 
Last edited:
I’m increasingly fascinated by how different our experiences are. Are people saying that their experience with doctors is that they don’t want to talk to you about root causes? That’s never been my experience. It’s been the opposite.
Yes. I gave the example with statins earlier in this thread. My doctor wanted me on statins. Full stop. No conversation. I opted for dietary changes and have had it under control for a decade.
IIRC, your doctor recommended HMG CoA reductase inhibitors because your cholesterol was above the level where lifestyle modification alone would be expected to get it in the acceptable range - we know diet/exercise may drop LDL 10-20%, for example.

And I seriously doubt he suggested you only take meds. Lifestyle modification is always part of a multimodal approach to improving cardiovascular risk.

But if he refused to discuss diet/exercise, while insisting meds were the only answer, you were right to seek another physician.
Yes, you're likely right that he was following guidelines and he was doing what was expected. I can't fault that. He was very firm in his counsel that statins were my only viable option and anything less was just going to prolong the damage. Perhaps i was an outlier that i could correct this with diet compared to what he's seen previously with people in similar situations. I probably sound more difficult than i really am. I'll defer to those that know more than me in most instances, but sometimes if there's a second option i might want to try that first if it's not dangerous or reckless.

I shouldn't say he refused to discuss lifestyle. He was just making it clear he thought it would only prolong the inevitable, and was insistent statins were going to be only solution. As my doctor we discussed lifestyle previously aswell, so maybe he didn't think there was enough room for improvement based on our conversations over the years.

I enjoy your input on medical topics. It's helped a lot to get a medical professionals take on things like this. It's easy for me to make assumptions based on my one sided perspective so it's nice to get an understanding about what's happening behind the curtain.
 
I think it's good that people do their own research. But it's vital people recognize their areas of expertise.

I can do my own electrical work, but I am not an electrician, and I'm certain none of you would want me doing your homes electrical. And if a master electrician told me I did something wrong I'm certainly not going to scoff at them and say the guy from YouTube disagrees, or assert that my opinion is as valid as his.
 
I think it's good that people do their own research. But it's vital people recognize their areas of expertise.

I can do my own electrical work, but I am not an electrician, and I'm certain none of you would want me doing your homes electrical. And if a master electrician told me I did something wrong I'm certainly not going to scoff at them and say the guy from YouTube disagrees, or assert that my opinion is as valid as his.
Interesting comparison. As a homeowner (in most states) you can do all your own electrical work you want. Only when you hire someone else do they need to be certified and/or permitted.

Earlier, I listed our window installer as someone who we caught making a mistake that would have been quite a bit of rework had we not questioned the expert's work. Coincidentally, we were having them enlarge our kitchen window and they found a switch and outlet in the way. They said they could have an electrician come out and have it moved in a couple days. I told them to take the rest of the day off, come back in the morning, and it would all be moved for them.

Electrical for a home is relatively simple. But yeah, for me I rely on my engineering background and occasional questions I ask of certified electricians that were colleagues of mine. Not a rando on YouTube.
 
Looking around a little at some other information on Means.

I like Dr. Andrew Huberman and think he usually does thoughtful interviews with people.

He interviews Dr. Means and said he loves her work and her book and talks to her here if people are looking to understand more.


In this episode, my guest is Dr. Casey Means, MD, a physician trained at Stanford University School of Medicine, an expert on metabolic health and the author of the book, "Good Energy." We discuss how to leverage nutrition, exercise and environmental factors to enhance your metabolic health by improving mitochondrial function, hormone and blood sugar regulation.

We also explore how fasting, deliberate cold exposure and spending time in nature can impact metabolic health, how to control food cravings and how to assess your metabolic health using blood testing, continuous glucose monitors and other tools.

Metabolic dysfunction is a leading cause of chronic disease, obesity and reduced lifespan around the world. Conversely, improving your mitochondrial and metabolic health can positively affect your health span and longevity.

Listeners of this episode will learn low- and zero-cost tools to improve their metabolic health, physical and mental well-being, body composition and target the root cause of various common diseases.

Read the full show notes, including referenced articles and additional resources: https://go.hubermanlab.com/nFNXu30
 
Looking around a little at some other information on Means.

I like Dr. Andrew Huberman and think he usually does thoughtful interviews with people.

He interviews Dr. Means and said he loves her work and her book and talks to her here if people are looking to understand more.


In this episode, my guest is Dr. Casey Means, MD, a physician trained at Stanford University School of Medicine, an expert on metabolic health and the author of the book, "Good Energy." We discuss how to leverage nutrition, exercise and environmental factors to enhance your metabolic health by improving mitochondrial function, hormone and blood sugar regulation.

We also explore how fasting, deliberate cold exposure and spending time in nature can impact metabolic health, how to control food cravings and how to assess your metabolic health using blood testing, continuous glucose monitors and other tools.

Metabolic dysfunction is a leading cause of chronic disease, obesity and reduced lifespan around the world. Conversely, improving your mitochondrial and metabolic health can positively affect your health span and longevity.

Listeners of this episode will learn low- and zero-cost tools to improve their metabolic health, physical and mental well-being, body composition and target the root cause of various common diseases.

Read the full show notes, including referenced articles and additional resources: https://go.hubermanlab.com/nFNXu30
On Huberman:

"His promotion of unregulated health supplements has been particularly controversial, as these products often have little scientific evidence supporting their effectiveness.[19] According to immunologist, microbiologist, and science communicator Andrea Love, Huberman's podcast content is characteristic of pseudoscience.[2]"

Not surprising he loves her work.
 
Looking around a little at some other information on Means.

I like Dr. Andrew Huberman and think he usually does thoughtful interviews with people.

He interviews Dr. Means and said he loves her work and her book and talks to her here if people are looking to understand more.


In this episode, my guest is Dr. Casey Means, MD, a physician trained at Stanford University School of Medicine, an expert on metabolic health and the author of the book, "Good Energy." We discuss how to leverage nutrition, exercise and environmental factors to enhance your metabolic health by improving mitochondrial function, hormone and blood sugar regulation.

We also explore how fasting, deliberate cold exposure and spending time in nature can impact metabolic health, how to control food cravings and how to assess your metabolic health using blood testing, continuous glucose monitors and other tools.

Metabolic dysfunction is a leading cause of chronic disease, obesity and reduced lifespan around the world. Conversely, improving your mitochondrial and metabolic health can positively affect your health span and longevity.

Listeners of this episode will learn low- and zero-cost tools to improve their metabolic health, physical and mental well-being, body composition and target the root cause of various common diseases.

Read the full show notes, including referenced articles and additional resources: https://go.hubermanlab.com/nFNXu30
On Huberman:

"His promotion of unregulated health supplements has been particularly controversial, as these products often have little scientific evidence supporting their effectiveness.[19] According to immunologist, microbiologist, and science communicator Andrea Love, Huberman's podcast content is characteristic of pseudoscience.[2]"

Not surprising he loves her work.

On a scale of 0 (none) to 10 (most) how much authority would you say Huberman has when talking about general health and wellness related issues?
 
Looking around a little at some other information on Means.

I like Dr. Andrew Huberman and think he usually does thoughtful interviews with people.

He interviews Dr. Means and said he loves her work and her book and talks to her here if people are looking to understand more.


In this episode, my guest is Dr. Casey Means, MD, a physician trained at Stanford University School of Medicine, an expert on metabolic health and the author of the book, "Good Energy." We discuss how to leverage nutrition, exercise and environmental factors to enhance your metabolic health by improving mitochondrial function, hormone and blood sugar regulation.

We also explore how fasting, deliberate cold exposure and spending time in nature can impact metabolic health, how to control food cravings and how to assess your metabolic health using blood testing, continuous glucose monitors and other tools.

Metabolic dysfunction is a leading cause of chronic disease, obesity and reduced lifespan around the world. Conversely, improving your mitochondrial and metabolic health can positively affect your health span and longevity.

Listeners of this episode will learn low- and zero-cost tools to improve their metabolic health, physical and mental well-being, body composition and target the root cause of various common diseases.

Read the full show notes, including referenced articles and additional resources: https://go.hubermanlab.com/nFNXu30
On Huberman:

"His promotion of unregulated health supplements has been particularly controversial, as these products often have little scientific evidence supporting their effectiveness.[19] According to immunologist, microbiologist, and science communicator Andrea Love, Huberman's podcast content is characteristic of pseudoscience.[2]"

Not surprising he loves her work.

On a scale of 0 (none) to 10 (most) how much authority would you say Huberman has when talking about general health and wellness related issues?
Don't know, don't really care.

When people push things that aren't backed by good evidence, it calls everything into question. Some of his message is likely good. Same goes with Means. But, it then becomes difficult to distinguish good info from bad info and isn't worth the trouble when there are plenty of worthwhile sources that provide credible info.
 
Looking around a little at some other information on Means.

I like Dr. Andrew Huberman and think he usually does thoughtful interviews with people.

He interviews Dr. Means and said he loves her work and her book and talks to her here if people are looking to understand more.


In this episode, my guest is Dr. Casey Means, MD, a physician trained at Stanford University School of Medicine, an expert on metabolic health and the author of the book, "Good Energy." We discuss how to leverage nutrition, exercise and environmental factors to enhance your metabolic health by improving mitochondrial function, hormone and blood sugar regulation.

We also explore how fasting, deliberate cold exposure and spending time in nature can impact metabolic health, how to control food cravings and how to assess your metabolic health using blood testing, continuous glucose monitors and other tools.

Metabolic dysfunction is a leading cause of chronic disease, obesity and reduced lifespan around the world. Conversely, improving your mitochondrial and metabolic health can positively affect your health span and longevity.

Listeners of this episode will learn low- and zero-cost tools to improve their metabolic health, physical and mental well-being, body composition and target the root cause of various common diseases.

Read the full show notes, including referenced articles and additional resources: https://go.hubermanlab.com/nFNXu30
On Huberman:

"His promotion of unregulated health supplements has been particularly controversial, as these products often have little scientific evidence supporting their effectiveness.[19] According to immunologist, microbiologist, and science communicator Andrea Love, Huberman's podcast content is characteristic of pseudoscience.[2]"

Not surprising he loves her work.

On a scale of 0 (none) to 10 (most) how much authority would you say Huberman has when talking about general health and wellness related issues?
Don't know, don't really care.

When people push things that aren't backed by good evidence, it calls everything into question. Some of his message is likely good. Same goes with Means. But, it then becomes difficult to distinguish good info from bad info and isn't worth the trouble when there are plenty of worthwhile sources that provide credible info.

Seems like you know and care enough to agree with a person who call his work pseudoscience. And infer Means is as well.

Do you think Dr. Huberman provides credible information?
 
Last edited:
Looking around a little at some other information on Means.

I like Dr. Andrew Huberman and think he usually does thoughtful interviews with people.

He interviews Dr. Means and said he loves her work and her book and talks to her here if people are looking to understand more.


In this episode, my guest is Dr. Casey Means, MD, a physician trained at Stanford University School of Medicine, an expert on metabolic health and the author of the book, "Good Energy." We discuss how to leverage nutrition, exercise and environmental factors to enhance your metabolic health by improving mitochondrial function, hormone and blood sugar regulation.

We also explore how fasting, deliberate cold exposure and spending time in nature can impact metabolic health, how to control food cravings and how to assess your metabolic health using blood testing, continuous glucose monitors and other tools.

Metabolic dysfunction is a leading cause of chronic disease, obesity and reduced lifespan around the world. Conversely, improving your mitochondrial and metabolic health can positively affect your health span and longevity.

Listeners of this episode will learn low- and zero-cost tools to improve their metabolic health, physical and mental well-being, body composition and target the root cause of various common diseases.

Read the full show notes, including referenced articles and additional resources: https://go.hubermanlab.com/nFNXu30
On Huberman:

"His promotion of unregulated health supplements has been particularly controversial, as these products often have little scientific evidence supporting their effectiveness.[19] According to immunologist, microbiologist, and science communicator Andrea Love, Huberman's podcast content is characteristic of pseudoscience.[2]"

Not surprising he loves her work.

On a scale of 0 (none) to 10 (most) how much authority would you say Huberman has when talking about general health and wellness related issues?
Don't know, don't really care.

When people push things that aren't backed by good evidence, it calls everything into question. Some of his message is likely good. Same goes with Means. But, it then becomes difficult to distinguish good info from bad info and isn't worth the trouble when there are plenty of worthwhile sources that provide credible info.

Seems like you care enough to agree with a person who call his work pseudoscience. And infer Means is as well.

Do you think Dr. Huberman provides credible information?
That's from his Wikipedia page. A quick Google search shows others that say the same thing. He promotes pseudoscience.

You seem to want to ignore that. I don't.

Again, some of what he may say is almost certainly credible. But when you tout things or give credence to ideas that aren't backed by evidence, especially on such a large platform, it invalidates your work. It's time consuming and fruitless to fact check what's accurate and what's not. Especially when there are others that provide similar guidance without the pseudoscience/quackery/grifting.

You clearly like to look at the message and not consider the source. I don't.

But when you post about someone here and give them credit for something, I'm going to call it out, every time I see it, when there's a red flag about it.
 
Looking around a little at some other information on Means.

I like Dr. Andrew Huberman and think he usually does thoughtful interviews with people.

He interviews Dr. Means and said he loves her work and her book and talks to her here if people are looking to understand more.


In this episode, my guest is Dr. Casey Means, MD, a physician trained at Stanford University School of Medicine, an expert on metabolic health and the author of the book, "Good Energy." We discuss how to leverage nutrition, exercise and environmental factors to enhance your metabolic health by improving mitochondrial function, hormone and blood sugar regulation.

We also explore how fasting, deliberate cold exposure and spending time in nature can impact metabolic health, how to control food cravings and how to assess your metabolic health using blood testing, continuous glucose monitors and other tools.

Metabolic dysfunction is a leading cause of chronic disease, obesity and reduced lifespan around the world. Conversely, improving your mitochondrial and metabolic health can positively affect your health span and longevity.

Listeners of this episode will learn low- and zero-cost tools to improve their metabolic health, physical and mental well-being, body composition and target the root cause of various common diseases.

Read the full show notes, including referenced articles and additional resources: https://go.hubermanlab.com/nFNXu30
On Huberman:

"His promotion of unregulated health supplements has been particularly controversial, as these products often have little scientific evidence supporting their effectiveness.[19] According to immunologist, microbiologist, and science communicator Andrea Love, Huberman's podcast content is characteristic of pseudoscience.[2]"

Not surprising he loves her work.

On a scale of 0 (none) to 10 (most) how much authority would you say Huberman has when talking about general health and wellness related issues?
Don't know, don't really care.

When people push things that aren't backed by good evidence, it calls everything into question. Some of his message is likely good. Same goes with Means. But, it then becomes difficult to distinguish good info from bad info and isn't worth the trouble when there are plenty of worthwhile sources that provide credible info.

Seems like you care enough to agree with a person who call his work pseudoscience. And infer Means is as well.

Do you think Dr. Huberman provides credible information?
Jumping in here but after doing my own research on Huberman and Means, who I'd not heard of either until brought up in here, neither seems 100% legit. Huberman comes across as someone selling something and is a little to slick for my liking. More like a feel-good guru than a reliable narrator of facts, imo.
 
Looking around a little at some other information on Means.

I like Dr. Andrew Huberman and think he usually does thoughtful interviews with people.

He interviews Dr. Means and said he loves her work and her book and talks to her here if people are looking to understand more.


In this episode, my guest is Dr. Casey Means, MD, a physician trained at Stanford University School of Medicine, an expert on metabolic health and the author of the book, "Good Energy." We discuss how to leverage nutrition, exercise and environmental factors to enhance your metabolic health by improving mitochondrial function, hormone and blood sugar regulation.

We also explore how fasting, deliberate cold exposure and spending time in nature can impact metabolic health, how to control food cravings and how to assess your metabolic health using blood testing, continuous glucose monitors and other tools.

Metabolic dysfunction is a leading cause of chronic disease, obesity and reduced lifespan around the world. Conversely, improving your mitochondrial and metabolic health can positively affect your health span and longevity.

Listeners of this episode will learn low- and zero-cost tools to improve their metabolic health, physical and mental well-being, body composition and target the root cause of various common diseases.

Read the full show notes, including referenced articles and additional resources: https://go.hubermanlab.com/nFNXu30
On Huberman:

"His promotion of unregulated health supplements has been particularly controversial, as these products often have little scientific evidence supporting their effectiveness.[19] According to immunologist, microbiologist, and science communicator Andrea Love, Huberman's podcast content is characteristic of pseudoscience.[2]"

Not surprising he loves her work.

On a scale of 0 (none) to 10 (most) how much authority would you say Huberman has when talking about general health and wellness related issues?
Don't know, don't really care.

When people push things that aren't backed by good evidence, it calls everything into question. Some of his message is likely good. Same goes with Means. But, it then becomes difficult to distinguish good info from bad info and isn't worth the trouble when there are plenty of worthwhile sources that provide credible info.

Seems like you care enough to agree with a person who call his work pseudoscience. And infer Means is as well.

Do you think Dr. Huberman provides credible information?
Jumping in here but after doing my own research on Huberman and Means, who I'd not heard of either until brought up in here, neither seems 100% legit. Huberman comes across as someone selling something and is a little to slick for my liking. More like a feel-good guru than a reliable narrator of facts, imo.
Review on Huberman (and a lot of my thoughts in a nutshell on people like him)
 
I think it's good that people do their own research. But it's vital people recognize their areas of expertise.

I can do my own electrical work, but I am not an electrician, and I'm certain none of you would want me doing your homes electrical. And if a master electrician told me I did something wrong I'm certainly not going to scoff at them and say the guy from YouTube disagrees, or assert that my opinion is as valid as his.
Interesting comparison. As a homeowner (in most states) you can do all your own electrical work you want. Only when you hire someone else do they need to be certified and/or permitted.

Earlier, I listed our window installer as someone who we caught making a mistake that would have been quite a bit of rework had we not questioned the expert's work. Coincidentally, we were having them enlarge our kitchen window and they found a switch and outlet in the way. They said they could have an electrician come out and have it moved in a couple days. I told them to take the rest of the day off, come back in the morning, and it would all be moved for them.

Electrical for a home is relatively simple. But yeah, for me I rely on my engineering background and occasional questions I ask of certified electricians that were colleagues of mine. Not a rando on YouTube.
And if your electrician colleague told you you were doing something wrong? What then?
 
Looking around a little at some other information on Means.

I like Dr. Andrew Huberman and think he usually does thoughtful interviews with people.

He interviews Dr. Means and said he loves her work and her book and talks to her here if people are looking to understand more.


In this episode, my guest is Dr. Casey Means, MD, a physician trained at Stanford University School of Medicine, an expert on metabolic health and the author of the book, "Good Energy." We discuss how to leverage nutrition, exercise and environmental factors to enhance your metabolic health by improving mitochondrial function, hormone and blood sugar regulation.

We also explore how fasting, deliberate cold exposure and spending time in nature can impact metabolic health, how to control food cravings and how to assess your metabolic health using blood testing, continuous glucose monitors and other tools.

Metabolic dysfunction is a leading cause of chronic disease, obesity and reduced lifespan around the world. Conversely, improving your mitochondrial and metabolic health can positively affect your health span and longevity.

Listeners of this episode will learn low- and zero-cost tools to improve their metabolic health, physical and mental well-being, body composition and target the root cause of various common diseases.

Read the full show notes, including referenced articles and additional resources: https://go.hubermanlab.com/nFNXu30
On Huberman:

"His promotion of unregulated health supplements has been particularly controversial, as these products often have little scientific evidence supporting their effectiveness.[19] According to immunologist, microbiologist, and science communicator Andrea Love, Huberman's podcast content is characteristic of pseudoscience.[2]"

Not surprising he loves her work.

On a scale of 0 (none) to 10 (most) how much authority would you say Huberman has when talking about general health and wellness related issues?
Don't know, don't really care.

When people push things that aren't backed by good evidence, it calls everything into question. Some of his message is likely good. Same goes with Means. But, it then becomes difficult to distinguish good info from bad info and isn't worth the trouble when there are plenty of worthwhile sources that provide credible info.

Seems like you care enough to agree with a person who call his work pseudoscience. And infer Means is as well.

Do you think Dr. Huberman provides credible information?
That's from his Wikipedia page. A quick Google search shows others that say the same thing. He promotes pseudoscience.

You seem to want to ignore that. I don't.

Again, some of what he may say is almost certainly credible. But when you tout things or give credence to ideas that aren't backed by evidence, especially on such a large platform, it invalidates your work. It's time consuming and fruitless to fact check what's accurate and what's not. Especially when there are others that provide similar guidance without the pseudoscience/quackery/grifting.

You clearly like to look at the message and not consider the source. I don't.

But when you post about someone here and give them credit for something, I'm going to call it out, every time I see it, when there's a red flag about it.
When people hear a message they already agree with, they are far less likely to dig deep into the validity of it. They get that dopamine hit of having their pre-conceived beliefs confirmed and that's enough for a lot of people.
 
Looking around a little at some other information on Means.

I like Dr. Andrew Huberman and think he usually does thoughtful interviews with people.

He interviews Dr. Means and said he loves her work and her book and talks to her here if people are looking to understand more.


In this episode, my guest is Dr. Casey Means, MD, a physician trained at Stanford University School of Medicine, an expert on metabolic health and the author of the book, "Good Energy." We discuss how to leverage nutrition, exercise and environmental factors to enhance your metabolic health by improving mitochondrial function, hormone and blood sugar regulation.

We also explore how fasting, deliberate cold exposure and spending time in nature can impact metabolic health, how to control food cravings and how to assess your metabolic health using blood testing, continuous glucose monitors and other tools.

Metabolic dysfunction is a leading cause of chronic disease, obesity and reduced lifespan around the world. Conversely, improving your mitochondrial and metabolic health can positively affect your health span and longevity.

Listeners of this episode will learn low- and zero-cost tools to improve their metabolic health, physical and mental well-being, body composition and target the root cause of various common diseases.

Read the full show notes, including referenced articles and additional resources: https://go.hubermanlab.com/nFNXu30
On Huberman:

"His promotion of unregulated health supplements has been particularly controversial, as these products often have little scientific evidence supporting their effectiveness.[19] According to immunologist, microbiologist, and science communicator Andrea Love, Huberman's podcast content is characteristic of pseudoscience.[2]"

Not surprising he loves her work.

On a scale of 0 (none) to 10 (most) how much authority would you say Huberman has when talking about general health and wellness related issues?
Don't know, don't really care.

When people push things that aren't backed by good evidence, it calls everything into question. Some of his message is likely good. Same goes with Means. But, it then becomes difficult to distinguish good info from bad info and isn't worth the trouble when there are plenty of worthwhile sources that provide credible info.

Seems like you care enough to agree with a person who call his work pseudoscience. And infer Means is as well.

Do you think Dr. Huberman provides credible information?
That's from his Wikipedia page. A quick Google search shows others that say the same thing. He promotes pseudoscience.

You seem to want to ignore that. I don't.

Again, some of what he may say is almost certainly credible. But when you tout things or give credence to ideas that aren't backed by evidence, especially on such a large platform, it invalidates your work. It's time consuming and fruitless to fact check what's accurate and what's not. Especially when there are others that provide similar guidance without the pseudoscience/quackery/grifting.

You clearly like to look at the message and not consider the source. I don't.

But when you post about someone here and give them credit for something, I'm going to call it out, every time I see it, when there's a red flag about it.

Thanks. I said I like Dr. Andrew Huberman and think he usually does thoughtful interviews with people. I don't think that's ignoring.

For giving people credit for something, I said Dr. Callie Means was a Stanford MD. I'm pretty sure that's correct.

As far as "You clearly like to look at the message and not consider the source. I don't.", not sure where you're getting that or why the snark but thanks for sharing your insights.
 
Looking around a little at some other information on Means.

I like Dr. Andrew Huberman and think he usually does thoughtful interviews with people.

He interviews Dr. Means and said he loves her work and her book and talks to her here if people are looking to understand more.


In this episode, my guest is Dr. Casey Means, MD, a physician trained at Stanford University School of Medicine, an expert on metabolic health and the author of the book, "Good Energy." We discuss how to leverage nutrition, exercise and environmental factors to enhance your metabolic health by improving mitochondrial function, hormone and blood sugar regulation.

We also explore how fasting, deliberate cold exposure and spending time in nature can impact metabolic health, how to control food cravings and how to assess your metabolic health using blood testing, continuous glucose monitors and other tools.

Metabolic dysfunction is a leading cause of chronic disease, obesity and reduced lifespan around the world. Conversely, improving your mitochondrial and metabolic health can positively affect your health span and longevity.

Listeners of this episode will learn low- and zero-cost tools to improve their metabolic health, physical and mental well-being, body composition and target the root cause of various common diseases.

Read the full show notes, including referenced articles and additional resources: https://go.hubermanlab.com/nFNXu30
On Huberman:

"His promotion of unregulated health supplements has been particularly controversial, as these products often have little scientific evidence supporting their effectiveness.[19] According to immunologist, microbiologist, and science communicator Andrea Love, Huberman's podcast content is characteristic of pseudoscience.[2]"

Not surprising he loves her work.

On a scale of 0 (none) to 10 (most) how much authority would you say Huberman has when talking about general health and wellness related issues?
Don't know, don't really care.

When people push things that aren't backed by good evidence, it calls everything into question. Some of his message is likely good. Same goes with Means. But, it then becomes difficult to distinguish good info from bad info and isn't worth the trouble when there are plenty of worthwhile sources that provide credible info.

Seems like you care enough to agree with a person who call his work pseudoscience. And infer Means is as well.

Do you think Dr. Huberman provides credible information?
That's from his Wikipedia page. A quick Google search shows others that say the same thing. He promotes pseudoscience.

You seem to want to ignore that. I don't.

Again, some of what he may say is almost certainly credible. But when you tout things or give credence to ideas that aren't backed by evidence, especially on such a large platform, it invalidates your work. It's time consuming and fruitless to fact check what's accurate and what's not. Especially when there are others that provide similar guidance without the pseudoscience/quackery/grifting.

You clearly like to look at the message and not consider the source. I don't.

But when you post about someone here and give them credit for something, I'm going to call it out, every time I see it, when there's a red flag about it.
When people hear a message they already agree with, they are far less likely to dig deep into the validity of it. They get that dopamine hit of having their pre-conceived beliefs confirmed and that's enough for a lot of people.

Definitely agree with that.
 
Looking around a little at some other information on Means.

I like Dr. Andrew Huberman and think he usually does thoughtful interviews with people.

He interviews Dr. Means and said he loves her work and her book and talks to her here if people are looking to understand more.


In this episode, my guest is Dr. Casey Means, MD, a physician trained at Stanford University School of Medicine, an expert on metabolic health and the author of the book, "Good Energy." We discuss how to leverage nutrition, exercise and environmental factors to enhance your metabolic health by improving mitochondrial function, hormone and blood sugar regulation.

We also explore how fasting, deliberate cold exposure and spending time in nature can impact metabolic health, how to control food cravings and how to assess your metabolic health using blood testing, continuous glucose monitors and other tools.

Metabolic dysfunction is a leading cause of chronic disease, obesity and reduced lifespan around the world. Conversely, improving your mitochondrial and metabolic health can positively affect your health span and longevity.

Listeners of this episode will learn low- and zero-cost tools to improve their metabolic health, physical and mental well-being, body composition and target the root cause of various common diseases.

Read the full show notes, including referenced articles and additional resources: https://go.hubermanlab.com/nFNXu30
On Huberman:

"His promotion of unregulated health supplements has been particularly controversial, as these products often have little scientific evidence supporting their effectiveness.[19] According to immunologist, microbiologist, and science communicator Andrea Love, Huberman's podcast content is characteristic of pseudoscience.[2]"

Not surprising he loves her work.

On a scale of 0 (none) to 10 (most) how much authority would you say Huberman has when talking about general health and wellness related issues?
Don't know, don't really care.

When people push things that aren't backed by good evidence, it calls everything into question. Some of his message is likely good. Same goes with Means. But, it then becomes difficult to distinguish good info from bad info and isn't worth the trouble when there are plenty of worthwhile sources that provide credible info.

Seems like you care enough to agree with a person who call his work pseudoscience. And infer Means is as well.

Do you think Dr. Huberman provides credible information?
That's from his Wikipedia page. A quick Google search shows others that say the same thing. He promotes pseudoscience.

You seem to want to ignore that. I don't.

Again, some of what he may say is almost certainly credible. But when you tout things or give credence to ideas that aren't backed by evidence, especially on such a large platform, it invalidates your work. It's time consuming and fruitless to fact check what's accurate and what's not. Especially when there are others that provide similar guidance without the pseudoscience/quackery/grifting.

You clearly like to look at the message and not consider the source. I don't.

But when you post about someone here and give them credit for something, I'm going to call it out, every time I see it, when there's a red flag about it.
When people hear a message they already agree with, they are far less likely to dig deep into the validity of it. They get that dopamine hit of having their pre-conceived beliefs confirmed and that's enough for a lot of people.
Which goes back to the original premise of this thread. It is not easy to discern the good info from the bad. The good research from the bad.

A guy like Huberman looks and sounds great, has all kinds of degrees, and is seemingly very trustworthy. Except that doesn't seem to be the case at all. And think of the literally tens of thousands (if not more) that listen and start to believe what he's promoting. And they bring that "research" and ask about it and use that.

That's this thread in a nutshell.
 
Looking around a little at some other information on Means.

I like Dr. Andrew Huberman and think he usually does thoughtful interviews with people.

He interviews Dr. Means and said he loves her work and her book and talks to her here if people are looking to understand more.


In this episode, my guest is Dr. Casey Means, MD, a physician trained at Stanford University School of Medicine, an expert on metabolic health and the author of the book, "Good Energy." We discuss how to leverage nutrition, exercise and environmental factors to enhance your metabolic health by improving mitochondrial function, hormone and blood sugar regulation.

We also explore how fasting, deliberate cold exposure and spending time in nature can impact metabolic health, how to control food cravings and how to assess your metabolic health using blood testing, continuous glucose monitors and other tools.

Metabolic dysfunction is a leading cause of chronic disease, obesity and reduced lifespan around the world. Conversely, improving your mitochondrial and metabolic health can positively affect your health span and longevity.

Listeners of this episode will learn low- and zero-cost tools to improve their metabolic health, physical and mental well-being, body composition and target the root cause of various common diseases.

Read the full show notes, including referenced articles and additional resources: https://go.hubermanlab.com/nFNXu30
On Huberman:

"His promotion of unregulated health supplements has been particularly controversial, as these products often have little scientific evidence supporting their effectiveness.[19] According to immunologist, microbiologist, and science communicator Andrea Love, Huberman's podcast content is characteristic of pseudoscience.[2]"

Not surprising he loves her work.

On a scale of 0 (none) to 10 (most) how much authority would you say Huberman has when talking about general health and wellness related issues?
Don't know, don't really care.

When people push things that aren't backed by good evidence, it calls everything into question. Some of his message is likely good. Same goes with Means. But, it then becomes difficult to distinguish good info from bad info and isn't worth the trouble when there are plenty of worthwhile sources that provide credible info.

Seems like you care enough to agree with a person who call his work pseudoscience. And infer Means is as well.

Do you think Dr. Huberman provides credible information?
That's from his Wikipedia page. A quick Google search shows others that say the same thing. He promotes pseudoscience.

You seem to want to ignore that. I don't.

Again, some of what he may say is almost certainly credible. But when you tout things or give credence to ideas that aren't backed by evidence, especially on such a large platform, it invalidates your work. It's time consuming and fruitless to fact check what's accurate and what's not. Especially when there are others that provide similar guidance without the pseudoscience/quackery/grifting.

You clearly like to look at the message and not consider the source. I don't.

But when you post about someone here and give them credit for something, I'm going to call it out, every time I see it, when there's a red flag about it.
When people hear a message they already agree with, they are far less likely to dig deep into the validity of it. They get that dopamine hit of having their pre-conceived beliefs confirmed and that's enough for a lot of people.
Which goes back to the original premise of this thread. It is not easy to discern the good info from the bad. The good research from the bad.

A guy like Huberman looks and sounds great, has all kinds of degrees, and is seemingly very trustworthy. Except that doesn't seem to be the case at all. And think of the literally tens of thousands (if not more) that listen and start to believe what he's promoting. And they bring that "research" and ask about it and use that.

That's this thread in a nutshell.
Yep, the snake oil salesmen people have always been capable of giving a sexy pitch for whatever it is they are selling, be it a product or an idea.

It takes work and training to be able to properly "do your own research" for the majority of scientific or medical topics. People have access to so much information they become deluded into thinking they know as much as a doctor or scientist about topic X because they can find a dozen articles on it, or browse WebMD or Wikipedia for hours on it.

I truly think the internet is the single worst thing to happen to this planet.
 
Looking around a little at some other information on Means.

I like Dr. Andrew Huberman and think he usually does thoughtful interviews with people.

He interviews Dr. Means and said he loves her work and her book and talks to her here if people are looking to understand more.


In this episode, my guest is Dr. Casey Means, MD, a physician trained at Stanford University School of Medicine, an expert on metabolic health and the author of the book, "Good Energy." We discuss how to leverage nutrition, exercise and environmental factors to enhance your metabolic health by improving mitochondrial function, hormone and blood sugar regulation.

We also explore how fasting, deliberate cold exposure and spending time in nature can impact metabolic health, how to control food cravings and how to assess your metabolic health using blood testing, continuous glucose monitors and other tools.

Metabolic dysfunction is a leading cause of chronic disease, obesity and reduced lifespan around the world. Conversely, improving your mitochondrial and metabolic health can positively affect your health span and longevity.

Listeners of this episode will learn low- and zero-cost tools to improve their metabolic health, physical and mental well-being, body composition and target the root cause of various common diseases.

Read the full show notes, including referenced articles and additional resources: https://go.hubermanlab.com/nFNXu30
On Huberman:

"His promotion of unregulated health supplements has been particularly controversial, as these products often have little scientific evidence supporting their effectiveness.[19] According to immunologist, microbiologist, and science communicator Andrea Love, Huberman's podcast content is characteristic of pseudoscience.[2]"

Not surprising he loves her work.

On a scale of 0 (none) to 10 (most) how much authority would you say Huberman has when talking about general health and wellness related issues?
Don't know, don't really care.

When people push things that aren't backed by good evidence, it calls everything into question. Some of his message is likely good. Same goes with Means. But, it then becomes difficult to distinguish good info from bad info and isn't worth the trouble when there are plenty of worthwhile sources that provide credible info.

Seems like you care enough to agree with a person who call his work pseudoscience. And infer Means is as well.

Do you think Dr. Huberman provides credible information?
That's from his Wikipedia page. A quick Google search shows others that say the same thing. He promotes pseudoscience.

You seem to want to ignore that. I don't.

Again, some of what he may say is almost certainly credible. But when you tout things or give credence to ideas that aren't backed by evidence, especially on such a large platform, it invalidates your work. It's time consuming and fruitless to fact check what's accurate and what's not. Especially when there are others that provide similar guidance without the pseudoscience/quackery/grifting.

You clearly like to look at the message and not consider the source. I don't.

But when you post about someone here and give them credit for something, I'm going to call it out, every time I see it, when there's a red flag about it.

Thanks. I said I like Dr. Andrew Huberman and think he usually does thoughtful interviews with people. I don't think that's ignoring.

For giving people credit for something, I said Dr. Callie Means was a Stanford MD. I'm pretty sure that's correct.

As far as "You clearly like to look at the message and not consider the source. I don't.", not sure where you're getting that or why the snark but thanks for sharing your insights.
That actually wasn't snark. Certainly nowhere near yours earlier in this thread.

You have repeatedly stated on here to listen to the message, not the messenger. Attack the post, not the poster. If I'm mistaken on that, feel free to clarify.

You've now been presented evidence about him promoting pseudoscience (not sure you were aware of that already or not), but yet STILL replied that you like his interviews. So it seems you are willing to ignore the source if you like the message.

:shrug:

P.S. -- You're welcome, my pleasure.
 
Looking around a little at some other information on Means.

I like Dr. Andrew Huberman and think he usually does thoughtful interviews with people.

He interviews Dr. Means and said he loves her work and her book and talks to her here if people are looking to understand more.


In this episode, my guest is Dr. Casey Means, MD, a physician trained at Stanford University School of Medicine, an expert on metabolic health and the author of the book, "Good Energy." We discuss how to leverage nutrition, exercise and environmental factors to enhance your metabolic health by improving mitochondrial function, hormone and blood sugar regulation.

We also explore how fasting, deliberate cold exposure and spending time in nature can impact metabolic health, how to control food cravings and how to assess your metabolic health using blood testing, continuous glucose monitors and other tools.

Metabolic dysfunction is a leading cause of chronic disease, obesity and reduced lifespan around the world. Conversely, improving your mitochondrial and metabolic health can positively affect your health span and longevity.

Listeners of this episode will learn low- and zero-cost tools to improve their metabolic health, physical and mental well-being, body composition and target the root cause of various common diseases.

Read the full show notes, including referenced articles and additional resources: https://go.hubermanlab.com/nFNXu30
On Huberman:

"His promotion of unregulated health supplements has been particularly controversial, as these products often have little scientific evidence supporting their effectiveness.[19] According to immunologist, microbiologist, and science communicator Andrea Love, Huberman's podcast content is characteristic of pseudoscience.[2]"

Not surprising he loves her work.

On a scale of 0 (none) to 10 (most) how much authority would you say Huberman has when talking about general health and wellness related issues?
Don't know, don't really care.

When people push things that aren't backed by good evidence, it calls everything into question. Some of his message is likely good. Same goes with Means. But, it then becomes difficult to distinguish good info from bad info and isn't worth the trouble when there are plenty of worthwhile sources that provide credible info.

Seems like you care enough to agree with a person who call his work pseudoscience. And infer Means is as well.

Do you think Dr. Huberman provides credible information?
Jumping in here but after doing my own research on Huberman and Means, who I'd not heard of either until brought up in here, neither seems 100% legit. Huberman comes across as someone selling something and is a little to slick for my liking. More like a feel-good guru than a reliable narrator of facts, imo.

With a carefully balanced and properly engineered prompt given to me by one LLM and input into another, the conclusion on Herberman is as follows:

Conclusion​

Andrew Huberman is a skilled science communicator who often provides well-intentioned and evidence-based advice. However, he has been credibly accused of promoting pseudoscience by:

  • Oversimplifying or overstating research findings,
  • Cherry-picking evidence,
  • Giving supplement and health advice that sometimes lacks strong scientific backing,
  • Occasionally contradicting established scientific consensus.
While many of his recommendations are reasonable for certain individuals, listeners should approach his advice—especially on supplements and controversial health topics—with critical thinking and consult healthcare professionals when making health decisions.
 
Looking around a little at some other information on Means.

I like Dr. Andrew Huberman and think he usually does thoughtful interviews with people.

He interviews Dr. Means and said he loves her work and her book and talks to her here if people are looking to understand more.


In this episode, my guest is Dr. Casey Means, MD, a physician trained at Stanford University School of Medicine, an expert on metabolic health and the author of the book, "Good Energy." We discuss how to leverage nutrition, exercise and environmental factors to enhance your metabolic health by improving mitochondrial function, hormone and blood sugar regulation.

We also explore how fasting, deliberate cold exposure and spending time in nature can impact metabolic health, how to control food cravings and how to assess your metabolic health using blood testing, continuous glucose monitors and other tools.

Metabolic dysfunction is a leading cause of chronic disease, obesity and reduced lifespan around the world. Conversely, improving your mitochondrial and metabolic health can positively affect your health span and longevity.

Listeners of this episode will learn low- and zero-cost tools to improve their metabolic health, physical and mental well-being, body composition and target the root cause of various common diseases.

Read the full show notes, including referenced articles and additional resources: https://go.hubermanlab.com/nFNXu30
On Huberman:

"His promotion of unregulated health supplements has been particularly controversial, as these products often have little scientific evidence supporting their effectiveness.[19] According to immunologist, microbiologist, and science communicator Andrea Love, Huberman's podcast content is characteristic of pseudoscience.[2]"

Not surprising he loves her work.

On a scale of 0 (none) to 10 (most) how much authority would you say Huberman has when talking about general health and wellness related issues?
Don't know, don't really care.

When people push things that aren't backed by good evidence, it calls everything into question. Some of his message is likely good. Same goes with Means. But, it then becomes difficult to distinguish good info from bad info and isn't worth the trouble when there are plenty of worthwhile sources that provide credible info.

Seems like you care enough to agree with a person who call his work pseudoscience. And infer Means is as well.

Do you think Dr. Huberman provides credible information?
That's from his Wikipedia page. A quick Google search shows others that say the same thing. He promotes pseudoscience.

You seem to want to ignore that. I don't.

Again, some of what he may say is almost certainly credible. But when you tout things or give credence to ideas that aren't backed by evidence, especially on such a large platform, it invalidates your work. It's time consuming and fruitless to fact check what's accurate and what's not. Especially when there are others that provide similar guidance without the pseudoscience/quackery/grifting.

You clearly like to look at the message and not consider the source. I don't.

But when you post about someone here and give them credit for something, I'm going to call it out, every time I see it, when there's a red flag about it.

Thanks. I said I like Dr. Andrew Huberman and think he usually does thoughtful interviews with people. I don't think that's ignoring.

For giving people credit for something, I said Dr. Callie Means was a Stanford MD. I'm pretty sure that's correct.

As far as "You clearly like to look at the message and not consider the source. I don't.", not sure where you're getting that or why the snark but thanks for sharing your insights.
That actually wasn't snark. Certainly nowhere near yours earlier in this thread.

You have repeatedly stated on here to listen to the message, not the messenger. Attack the post, not the poster. If I'm mistaken on that, feel free to clarify.

You've now been presented evidence about him promoting pseudoscience (not sure you were aware of that already or not), but yet STILL replied that you like his interviews. So it seems you are willing to ignore the source if you like the message.

:shrug:

P.S. -- You're welcome, my pleasure.

I apologized for my tone earlier in the thread several pages back.

We'll disagree on the tone and snark of your post. For the "my pleasure", it's a bummer to see what I had mistakenly assumed to be a friendship spiral down to something obviously different. Clearly, I've done something to offend, and I again, I apologize.
 
And, to further clarify, there are people that reach large audiences and do good work.

One that was referenced a LOT here in other threads (namely the Covid thread) was Your Local Epidemiologist -- Katelyn Jetelina.

Her site has grown exponentially, now has a team, and is earning her a huge following. She started at the beginning of Covid and does a wonderful job looking at evidence and breaking it down.

THAT is the kind of person to follow. She's likely getting paid handsomely for it at this point and it's well deserved.

There's too many smart, credible people with messages to help others with health to get caught up with those that do the opposite.
 
I think it's good that people do their own research. But it's vital people recognize their areas of expertise.

I can do my own electrical work, but I am not an electrician, and I'm certain none of you would want me doing your homes electrical. And if a master electrician told me I did something wrong I'm certainly not going to scoff at them and say the guy from YouTube disagrees, or assert that my opinion is as valid as his.
Interesting comparison. As a homeowner (in most states) you can do all your own electrical work you want. Only when you hire someone else do they need to be certified and/or permitted.

Earlier, I listed our window installer as someone who we caught making a mistake that would have been quite a bit of rework had we not questioned the expert's work. Coincidentally, we were having them enlarge our kitchen window and they found a switch and outlet in the way. They said they could have an electrician come out and have it moved in a couple days. I told them to take the rest of the day off, come back in the morning, and it would all be moved for them.

Electrical for a home is relatively simple. But yeah, for me I rely on my engineering background and occasional questions I ask of certified electricians that were colleagues of mine. Not a rando on YouTube.
And if your electrician colleague told you you were doing something wrong? What then?
Like I'm going to listen to some mouthpiece for "Big Electricity"
 
I’ve seen some Hubermann tweets. He definitely talks a lot about things that are largely not rigorously proven, yet.

I consider that an opportunity to investigate more, which depending on the significance of what I’m considering and what I learn, may or may not include consulting a physician.

It doesn’t have to be Huberman is a fraud or Huberman is truth and exactness personified. I consider him food for more thought. Hard to see the objection.
 
I think it's good that people do their own research. But it's vital people recognize their areas of expertise.

I can do my own electrical work, but I am not an electrician, and I'm certain none of you would want me doing your homes electrical. And if a master electrician told me I did something wrong I'm certainly not going to scoff at them and say the guy from YouTube disagrees, or assert that my opinion is as valid as his.
Interesting comparison. As a homeowner (in most states) you can do all your own electrical work you want. Only when you hire someone else do they need to be certified and/or permitted.

Earlier, I listed our window installer as someone who we caught making a mistake that would have been quite a bit of rework had we not questioned the expert's work. Coincidentally, we were having them enlarge our kitchen window and they found a switch and outlet in the way. They said they could have an electrician come out and have it moved in a couple days. I told them to take the rest of the day off, come back in the morning, and it would all be moved for them.

Electrical for a home is relatively simple. But yeah, for me I rely on my engineering background and occasional questions I ask of certified electricians that were colleagues of mine. Not a rando on YouTube.
And if your electrician colleague told you you were doing something wrong? What then?
Double check the work to see if it needs correction, of course.
 
I’m increasingly fascinated by how different our experiences are. Are people saying that their experience with doctors is that they don’t want to talk to you about root causes? That’s never been my experience. It’s been the opposite.
Yes. I gave the example with statins earlier in this thread. My doctor wanted me on statins. Full stop. No conversation. I opted for dietary changes and have had it under control for a decade.
IIRC, your doctor recommended HMG CoA reductase inhibitors because your cholesterol was above the level where lifestyle modification alone would be expected to get it in the acceptable range - we know diet/exercise may drop LDL 10-20%, for example.

And I seriously doubt he suggested you only take meds. Lifestyle modification is always part of a multimodal approach to improving cardiovascular risk.

But if he refused to discuss diet/exercise, while insisting meds were the only answer, you were right to seek another physician.
Yes, you're likely right that he was following guidelines and he was doing what was expected. I can't fault that. He was very firm in his counsel that statins were my only viable option and anything less was just going to prolong the damage. Perhaps i was an outlier that i could correct this with diet compared to what he's seen previously with people in similar situations. I probably sound more difficult than i really am. I'll defer to those that know more than me in most instances, but sometimes if there's a second option i might want to try that first if it's not dangerous or reckless.

I shouldn't say he refused to discuss lifestyle. He was just making it clear he thought it would only prolong the inevitable, and was insistent statins were going to be only solution. As my doctor we discussed lifestyle previously aswell, so maybe he didn't think there was enough room for improvement based on our conversations over the years.

I enjoy your input on medical topics. It's helped a lot to get a medical professionals take on things like this. It's easy for me to make assumptions based on my one sided perspective so it's nice to get an understanding about what's happening behind the curtain.
It sounds like his advice was good, but delivery left something to be desired. Realistically, it takes years-decades for high cholesterol to do significant damage, so a few months off meds probably wouldn’t be the end of the world anyway.

Doctors shouldn’t be so paternalistic, as shared decision making is an important part of establishing rapport. Ultimately, it’s your choice, of course.

Still, I’d confirm with your new doctor that your current LDL is acceptable, realizing “ideal” levels haven’t been firmly established.

The PREVENT risk calculator is a good place to start: 10 year risk > 7.5% is where pharmacologic intervention is traditionally recommended, with a goal 30% reduction in LDL. Moreover, there are some “risk-enhancing” factors that should be considered, which may make your LDL target even lower.

Lastly, as I mentioned before, there’s data to suggest driving LDL to very low levels is associated with improved cardiovascular risk, with near linear benefit in mortality reduction all the way down to 45 mg/dL. Newer guidelines have shifted LDL targets lower to reflect this finding, particularly in high risk patients.
 
Last edited:
And to add - I think it's a given that everyone here is in the top 95% of everything. This is the FFA after all. ;)
I was being facetious, in response to AK’s prior boast. But the sad reality is
I’m increasingly fascinated by how different our experiences are. Are people saying that their experience with doctors is that they don’t want to talk to you about root causes? That’s never been my experience. It’s been the opposite.
Yes. I gave the example with statins earlier in this thread. My doctor wanted me on statins. Full stop. No conversation. I opted for dietary changes and have had it under control for a decade.
IIRC, your doctor recommended HMG CoA reductase inhibitors because your cholesterol was above the level where lifestyle modification alone would be expected to get it in the acceptable range - we know diet/exercise may drop LDL 10-20%, for example.

And I seriously doubt he suggested you only take meds. Lifestyle modification is always part of a multimodal approach to improving cardiovascular risk.

But if he refused to discuss diet/exercise, while insisting meds were the only answer, you were right to seek another physician.
Yes, you're likely right that he was following guidelines and he was doing what was expected. I can't fault that. He was very firm in his counsel that statins were my only viable option and anything less was just going to prolong the damage. Perhaps i was an outlier that i could correct this with diet compared to what he's seen previously with people in similar situations. I probably sound more difficult than i really am. I'll defer to those that know more than me in most instances, but sometimes if there's a second option i might want to try that first if it's not dangerous or reckless.

I shouldn't say he refused to discuss lifestyle. He was just making it clear he thought it would only prolong the inevitable, and was insistent statins were going to be only solution. As my doctor we discussed lifestyle previously aswell, so maybe he didn't think there was enough room for improvement based on our conversations over the years.

I enjoy your input on medical topics. It's helped a lot to get a medical professionals take on things like this. It's easy for me to make assumptions based on my one sided perspective so it's nice to get an understanding about what's happening behind the curtain.
It sounds like his advice was good, but delivery left something to be desired. Realistically, it takes years-decades for high cholesterol to do significant damage, so a few months off meds probably wouldn’t be the end of the world anyway.

Doctors shouldn’t be so paternalistic, as shared decision making is an important part of establishing rapport. Ultimately, it’s your choice, of course.

Still, I’d confirm with your new doctor that your current LDL is acceptable, realizing “ideal” levels haven’t been firmly established.

The PREVENT risk calculator is a good place to start: 10 year risk > 7.5% is where pharmacologic intervention is traditionally recommended, with a goal 30% reduction in LDL. Moreover, there are some “risk-enhancing” factors that should be considered, which may make your LDL target even lower.

Lastly, as I mentioned before, there’s data to suggest driving LDL to very low levels is associated with improved cardiovascular risk, with near linear benefit in mortality reduction all the way down to 45 mg/dL. Newer guidelines have shifted LDL targets lower to reflect this finding, particularly in high risk patients.
Term, interested in what you think about the ApoB test as an additional datapoint for people concerned about cholesterol levels and heart health?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top