What about the calcium in Moringa powder? I add moringa powder to my green smoothies.

How does one explain the long life expectancy of Sicilian men living to 100 and drinking literally 2 glasses of wine a day?

Thank you for the honest answers on an important subject.

I doubt you need to give a stool sample to be told that eating chocolate digestive biscuits is sub optimal for gut health or any other health for that matter...

Such a Great Scientific Channel . Amazing . Just Seeing your have make me forgotten My IBS. I Will be free from it very Soon InshAllah

🤥🤥🤥🤥🗑️🗑️🗑️🗑️

Please use a professional camera and some lights . But u know your content is so interesting and more than pro

That App will soon be based on the latest AI, GPT-4o. You will use your phone to show it what you are eating and it will nag you to death.

This Dr Stan is not actually a doctor at all, in my experience when someone claims to be someone they are not they can commonly be claimed to be a fraud.

My mum lives to 91 year old and lucky she didn’t have dementia or maybe because of her clean living due to her religion. Never see a doctor because she declined it, hearing was good apart from she lost her eyesight ( glaucoma) could be easily treated but we can’t take her to doctor because of her belief. My late father died age 89 did have dementia because he drinks heavily during his younger years.

A Great Analysis Indeed. 👍👍

"We don't have to make up a whole cinematic universe" hahaha that one got me

So it's basically a coach, not much more , and the science of personalized nutrition is not there yet, and customers are paying to provide Zoe research data in exchange for some generalised nutritional information.

Dr. Eric Berg is not EVEN A REAL DOCTOR masquerading like a real doctor with a DR in his name when he is just a chiropractor youtube should fix this kind of shady deceiving practices alot of people listen to the nonsense he says not doing their research that his not a real doctor, how can you trust some one when their name is already shady from the start

Thanks for debunking this. The guy seems like a 'tell you what you want to hear' type of dude.

So they were doing 4 min HIIT, then 3 min rest for 4 cycles or 1 min HIIT and 1 min rest for 4 cycles?

Gil please release a book, you are literally the best, most trustworthy and factual based Nutrition KZbinr there is.

Same u-shaped curve regarding alcohol use, and same erroneous conclusion moderate drinking is better than no drinking or excessive drinking. The sick-quitter effect...

Thank you Gil I’ve just found you and I’m on my journey to understanding beans. As roast vegetables are good yet it’s time to boost my health with bean goodness.

I found the Continuous Glucose Monitor very useful and enlightening. Unfortunately when the results arrived I was too interested to read them than to read the small print which signed me up for another year and an amount of money I wasn't happy to spend. I managed to get hold of a representative and although I had to pay the first month, eventually (with a hiccup one month later) the direct debits from my account stopped. I think it's a good programme but the financial obligations could be spelt out better.

Sounds like hokum. Any diet that you adhere to will probably work. The key to any diet is that you have to be committed and be willing to sacrifice. By the way Gil, adhere is pronounced, Ad-hear not ahh-deer.

You can reach 1.6 g of Protein per kg (= 2 times the RDA and probably the ideal amount if you're physically active) even with a vegan diet with the right priorities, no problem. It's not about whether or not you include animals sources of protein. 600 g of beef cover the daily need for iron, while raising LDL cholesterol, increasing inflammation and the risk of various cancers. 1 tablespoon of barley grass covers nearly 100% of the daily requirement of iron. Now tell me again how we need meat to cover our iron requirements.

I always say, all the info and inspiration you'll ever need is already on youtube for free.

People hoping that their personalized diet is going to include ice cream and McDonalds. Move on guys, wholefoods, PUFAs, variety of fruits and vegetables, control saturated fat and exercise. No need of paying 650 USD.

I just watched the documentary recently and didn’t know it was so old. Anyway, I follow u and have been changing my diet and after watching the documentary decided to go plant based only. That was about 5 weeks ago. It’s a little hard because I have to learn about nutrition and also how to cook plant based food so it tastes delicious. Is a process but I am sticking to it. I haven’t eaten red meat in approximately 40 years and only about 5 years ago decided to eat chicken and turkey again. Now I’m going back to my pescatarian diet, fish once in a while because I am the only one in the house going plant based and need something to eat with them. Thank u for all the information and especially for the way u explain concepts and ideas. Great job!!

I follow the science and of course results. What Gil does for me; When I cheat on keto it's not so bad.

I think there is a lot of solid info on the Zoe youtube channel .. but to be honest was never aware of their business model and the cost is prohibitive.. Nutrition Made Simple is the gold standard when it come to unbiased reliable information ... Thanks Gil...

A random set of biomarkers would not be representative. Better would be mixing up everyone in the control, so they have someone else's in the group. And of course, double-blind.

Wow. Your proposed Sham personalization group blew my mind. And I was wondering how to do an RCT on the effectiveness of an app. Great Video as always! My favourite channel.

It’s always worth listening to your intelligent analysis. Thank you

If you have clogged blood vessels, you are setting yourself up for a cardiac arrest with HIIT. HIIT requires far more oxygen & blood flow to the affected tissues. Start slow with light & medium intensity physical activities such as brisk walks, aerobics, swimming, floor exercises, deep stretching, resistance training, skipping, a game of badminton or tennis, perhaps ! Introduce very short internal HIIT only & only after your blood circulation, and vascular health has improved to the extent that your body has already adapted to light & medium intensity activities.

I think Zoe is trying to do something really new (personalized nutrition), and the people working behind it are legit, actual scientists. They are not there yet, or at least it is not clear if they are, but their program certainly helps people who are lost. In any case, they are in the right direction, I honestly hope they keep improving.

zoe's method of overcomplicating the weight loss process really fucked me up when i started losing weight. i had food aversions and started eating stuff i don't even like such as tempe lol, i was spending 2x as much on organic food because tim spector said it's more optimal for health. it was some of the first nutrition related content i found and it convinced me that being healthy takes obsession and extreme precision

So, coach providing feedback, encouragement and guidance is better than just receiving advice... Mind blowing! :) Same with intense psychotherapy vs. waitlist / booklet.

geez damn if you do damn if you don't!

Isnt there enough information gathering already. Just got to match the information gathered on us, to our health records, to find the best diet. Dont know about paying information gatherers

Superb analysis. Thank you. As with the criticisms surrounding a very well-known YT vegan-camp doctor, effect size and overstatement really matter as well. If having a perfectly tailored diet for my personal biology, scientifically substantiated, barely reaches statistical significance in its impacts, or even fails to in several major metrics, is that worth all the hassle and money to incorporate it compared to just eating a mostly whole-foods, plant-based, balanced diet and being very active? For most people like me, I'm guessing the answer would be that it is not. I don't live to eat, champion my diet and its guru, or care to navel-gaze at the results with others in the fanatics club, as much as social media promotes that sort of thing across many areas of life.

Zoe of course is very plant based, high fibre, micro biome centric. There was a lady reviewing her experience of the Zoe app on KZbin and she made the interesting remark that oats were a food that spiked her blood sugar (on the CGM) yet the algorithm recommended them as a good food for her. She queried this and was told that the presence of fibre outweighed any potential downside from higher blood sugar. Clearly this is simply an opinion - I’m not saying it’s wrong or right, but nonetheless it is an opinion and so the algorithm is perhaps not as scientific as all that. Equally, in terms of study design, the only issue with a sham diet would be that depending on the bio markers we want to check, it’s easy enough to create a diet that pushes them all in the wrong direction. Equally, it could be compared to a diet that pushes them all more strongly in the desired direction. I did watch their original announcement and they said xyz improved, but didn’t quote any figures … thus hard to be sure exactly what they are trying to claim. As for the more subjective things based on what people ‘feel’, I’m sure if I were paying $650 per year my brain would convince me I felt better :-). We see the same thing with people on keto, carnivore, vegan, vegetarian etc. - they all say they feel much better (and perhaps this is true if they came to a new dietary pattern from the famous s.a.d.

What about matching everyone in group B with someone from group A and having them undergo the same steps to receive a personalized plan but giving them their counterpart's plan instead? You could pair them based on weight so caloric suggestions don't seem too wild.

Excellent insights as usual .

I agree that the control group was a bit weak. I would argue that an ideal control would have been treated exactly the same as the Zoe, but unknowingly put on a standard whole food Mediterranean diet. This would compare a proven, but not customized diet against a customized one with a minimum of confounders.

I like many of the key people at Zoe but this study was clearly biased towards a positive outcome and that is disappointing. My preference would be for a sham intervention. All support the same, recommended to USDA or Mediterranean. That would allow some greater insights.

If they're testing an intervention it's the extra attention that is being tested. This is the point of the study (of the product their selling).

Timmy is a bit sketchy. Using his professorship and expert status to get rich.

I understand the point you are making about judging a study based on its design no matter who it is funded by. However, that idea assumes that the quality of the study can in fact be inferred from the description by the authors. There has been an unnerving number of cases of known scientific fraud in studies that have been published in reputable journals. I am more familiar with this issue in social psychology than nutrition, but nonetheless, should people be suspicious when the people who carry out a study have a vested interest in how it turns out, even when they describe a study that should yield high quality data? (Of course skepticism is often not required because industry studies often clearly don't actually support the claims for which they are used as evidence.)

Hi Gil. Thanks for posting about this. I'm one of the study co-authors and ZOE's US Medical Director. Love your channel and you raise many good points about our study. There are a few things I'd like to clarify: - The purpose of the study was to assess the effect of the ZOE program when compared to standard care in the US. As I'm sure you can appreciate, most patients receive little to no actual dietary guidance from their doctor. The question to ask yourself is whether we are appropriately approximating the amount of attention a person receives in the current healthcare system when it comes to their diet. As you point out, the control group also had follow up contact with our study coordinators, encouragement, and they knew they were participating in a nutrition clinical trial. I think there's actually a strong argument that they got far more dietary advice in our trial than is standard in the US. - Our intervention is the ZOE program. You and many other researchers raise questions about the advice or the personalization, but these are secondary questions. The first question needs to be whether or not the program actually works, actually helps people in the real world. We could have amazing advice/personalization, but it still needs to be delivered in a format that helps people achieve dietary change. Of course, we considered the option of making the study about personalization, but this is more of a mechanistic question as opposed to answering the more important question, "Does the ZOE program outperform standard dietary advice in the US?" They're different questions. You can decide which you'd want to prove if you were in our shoes. - We did not do a sham trial (that would require a dedicated RCT), but we did a subgroup analysis looking at people who were highly adherent to ZOE advice against those who were highly adherent to US Dietary Guidelines. After controlling for adherence in this way, those following the ZOE program lost more weight and significantly greater improvements in their Apo B and total cholesterol. This is important and found on page 6 of the manuscript (below Figure 4.) - We had to fund this study. That seems quite obvious. But it's also an RCT, we posted it publicly, we posted our analysis plan ahead of time, and we've published our full results including the ones that were a disappointment. It's the best we can do. - Meanwhile, there are many, many products that people routinely buy, they have zero research to back them, and they fly below the radar and don't get scrutinized. Speaking for myself as a gastroenterologist, every day I had patients bringing in microbiome reports that cost $650 or more and they were completely worthless. - Whether or not ZOE is worth it depends on the individual. It's very easy to say, "Just eat more plants." It's true, if people actually did that we'd be much healthier. But people aren't doing that. We've been giving that advice for decades and people aren't taking it. I've written books about consuming more fiber, still 95% of Americans are fiber deficient but year after year spend a ton of money on healthcare. Put against healthcare costs, the ZOE program starts to look quite similar to a gym membership and relatively inexpensive. Whether or not a program that's been proven by a clinical trial to improve multiple measures of health is worth it is really their choice. I think when you consider the amount of metabolic disease that exists today despite many books, podcasts and youtube channels providing dietary advice, I'm excited for the people who do find benefit in the ZOE program. I'm happy to discuss this further and answer any questions. Thanks for your channel and the great work you do. - Will Bulsiewicz, MD MSCI

My previous employer was involved in a clinical trial (I don’t have the reference) on chronic alcohol and drug abuse. Relapse rate after rehab is something like 90% after 12 months. They did a study with telemedicine and smart devices which enabled tracking of activity and basic reading combined with strong supervision and support done remotely and with self help networking (like it’s 11am, you still in bed, want a chat with someone?). There were multiple groups and controls, a complex experimental design. Only 30% relapse after 12 months. Much of it down to the close support. So monitoring and support are principle components and need to be controlled. Incidentally, I don’t know why the trial didn’t have a larger impact on healthcare. It was low cost compared to relapse and rehab. If anyone does want the reference, I could probably find it.

Off subject; is creatine healthy for seniors

For those lost in the weeds who need detailed guidance, this app is probably quite beneficial.

My first question is "What science are they actually basis this on?" I'm really not aware of any research that would indicate that you can optimize someone's diet based on individual test results - outside of medical issues, of course. Let's just say you have a group of relatively healthy individuals who get the Zoe app. Other than calories, what are you going to change? If I were to say to everyone just avoid ultra-processed foods, eat plenty of fruit and veg, whole grains, and a reasonable amount of lean meats, wouldn't that be pretty much cover everything?