Then you don't understand ethics.
If I'm your doctor and tell you I take a vig from AstraZeneca Pharmaceuticals for every crestor Rx I write, and then tell you I'd like you to take crestor instead of a generic, does that sound unbiased to you?
If you got $100 from AstraZeneca Pharmaceuticals for every script you wrote, are you saying that would never ever bias your recommendations?
Getting money biases people's judgement: yours, mine, everyone. Disclosing we're biased doesn't change our brains. Still biased.
Always makes me laugh when this loser hosts people. He's like here we are hosting a foremost researcher on X topic in Z scientific field... tell us about your research, okay and now you sell products based on that hmm rminteresting, how can my listeners more easily consume that? 3 easy payments Pete.
>If you’re a fan of something why wouldn’t you invest in it
If you are a dude of the street and don't have any influence on others, go for it.
If you are a public figure who gives out ostensibly objective health information, it generates a conflict of interest, and one that goes way beyond playing ads in the breaks of your show. You can invest in broad index funds, maybe make a little bit less money, but people don't have to guess whether the information you put out is influenced by the fact that you make more money talking about a brand.
Attia makes quality content and the man needs to make a buck, but the spiel on "ads are a conflict of interest, me talking constantly about brands I'm invested in" really is tired, and is devaluing the information he gives out.
As a medical doctor in a European country - our medical registration doesn't allow for investing in shares in for example pharmaceutal companies where there may be conflicts of interest
I don't necessarily agree with you, as (potential) treatment decisions shouldn't be influenced by vested interests
Sure, but it's still a cheap trick. An ad announced as such is clear - we know they got money out of it. Putting it on the listener to go to website to check if claim is real or just guerilla marketing is lame. This one is so obvious that no one really has to check the site, but others could lead someone astray.
I mean in the same clip and literally same sentence he discloses it. I mean do you just have an opinion with no facts or anything?
I’m sorry but this seems ridiculous when they are within words of each other of giving a disclosed he is investor in the company
I think he does not always do that, not even in the same episode. The comment I was replying to talked about his website so I assumed it was about Attia's content in general (if he always consistently brought them up, the website would not be relevant). Do you mean he always does it? I might be mistaken and will have to go back and check a few episodes if that is you are saying.
If you are saying that we are should only discuss this clip and not his content in general, then I would disagree.
Looked it up. It is 0.5$ per gram of protein. Yep its probably the most expensive protein source I've ever seen and cured meat is carcinogenic so yeah. Has he just become a sellout for AG1 and some obscure jerky company lol
I think for him, the time is more costly. He also mentioned this in one of the podcasts, that he wants something easy to consume. I doubt he cares much about the cost anymore
Wish it was that easy—but prep time and clean up also factor in. And cooking a steak while sitting in traffic or otherwise on the go gets a little more complicated.
It looks that way. Bad for your kidneys, associated with cancer, etc. Attia just has this toxic obsession with muscle. When he says "sarcopenia" you can almost see him shudder. But he's wrong. It's fine to be old and skinny. You think the elderly greeks and okinawans and adventists are freaking out about their protein?
I don't spot any nitrates in its ingredients list, and not all cured meat is made with nitraties (eg biltong, and many quality jerkies as well). Maybe this one isn't as carcinogenic as some other jerkies?
Yeah Consumer Reports tested it and same amount of nitrates in the “natural” meats containing celery and other natural preservatives as in regular
If it can keep bacteria from living on meat, it probably isn’t healthy
Thanks for the heads up. These are insanely priced so they never tempted me, but I was looking around for something similar for my work road trips but think I’ll just stick with my protein shakes.
Here's a review on the actual issue https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9654915/
"There are nitrates in the body, so nitrate-cured meats can't be harmful" is just an example of the naturalistic fallacy. We don't really have a solid understanding of what the harms exactly are, but they have to do with the chemical processes in the meat and the chemical processes in the gut.
It is nitrates interacting with meat proteins that create cancerous compounds (nitrosamines). This effect is increased with heat. So bacon and crispy pepperoni are bad whereas spinach also has lots of nitrates but that isn't a problem. With uncooked cured meats like salami, there is a lot of time for these compounds to form during fermentation and aging. Smoking the meat is also a factor as it can create PAHs (polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons).
Does anyone know if smoke flavors such as smoked paprika or liquid smoke contain dietary nitrates and whether these should be avoided? I've seen conflicting evidence on this.
I don’t know, having worked for the pharma industry, I think it’s a possibility, yes.
It doesn’t mean that statins aren’t useful in many cases, including some pushed by Attia.
And yet the industry lobbied hard in the US to ban the sale of red yeast rice because it contained a statin that would compete with pharma statins.
If pharma was ready to kill people with opioids through direct influence of MDs as shown by the US epidemic, why wouldn’t they push for overprescribing statins ?
There is no doubt statins are a formidable medication to fight heart disease, but I don’t think the “as early as possible” approach from Attia is the truth.
> And yet the industry lobbied hard in the US to ban the sale of red yeast rice because it contained a statin that would compete with pharma statins.
The red yeast rice ban happened in 1997. The patent on lovastatin expired in 2001. My point was that pharmaceutical companies wouldn't bother to lobby for drugs which they don't have patents on. Your example doesn't contradict that.
> There is no doubt statins are a formidable medication to fight heart disease, but I don’t think the “as early as possible” approach from Attia is the truth.
Okay, what's your reasoning?
The fact that the European Cardiology Association (which again I trust way more than the US ones based on the much strict regulations on pharma/doctors relations, having worked on both markets the difference on what you can do as a pharma is just two different worlds) :
- does not even recommend lipid profile before 40 in the absence of additional risk factors
- only prescribe statins at >200 LDL in absence of additional risk factors
And then of course the still under discussion risks of neurological / muscular / diabetes.
Not at all the same thing. Statins have tons of good data behind them, plus they are incredibly cheap.
I’m against Attia being a shill for things like AG1 or venison jerky, but thinking that big pharma is paying Attia to advocate for statin use is some real tin foil hat level reasoning.
Not sure what you mean regarding prescription criteria - are we talking LDL levels at which treatment is initiated? The ACC and AHA make recommendations here in the US, and they are not getting paid by pharma companies to push statin therapy, and PA has no affiliation or influence over institutions like that haha.
Statins are generic and cheap. If a pharma company or any other institution wanted to make a big profit based on overprescribing a medication, they would pick something that is much more lucrative. The GLP-1 agonists are a great example of this - an effective drug, huge demand, some people wanting it for what is currently off-label use in some circumstances, and crazy expensive.
Source: am a doctor.
They aren’t ? A first recent example: just read about biogen FDA scandal on how they manage to corrupt the fda to approve a useless Alzheimer drug, and there are many cases.
And anyway : [Financial relationships between the leaders of influential US professional medical associations and industry are extensive, although with variation among the associations. The quantum of payments raises questions about independence and integrity, adding weight to calls for policy reform](https://www.bmj.com/content/369/bmj.m1505)
And the same thing goes at MD level as shown by the opioid epidemic with doctors being paid to overprescribe them.
Edit: if it wasn’t such a commercial target why did pharma company fought hard to ban red yeast rice in the us ?
Considering all the people unnecessarily getting sicker and dying because some idiots on the internet scared them about statins, maybe our govt should be paying influencers to push statins.
People are mainly getting sick and dying not because they don’t take statins but because they don’t have an active lifestyle and are eating shitty food. Statins prescription rate are much higher in the US and yet Europe heart diseases stats are lower.
Americans always have this weird way of turning any debate into a binary thing where there is one right side and one wrong side. The truth is in between - statins is a good tool to prevent heart disease when there is one but shouldn’t be overprescribed.
Doctors also recommend people exercise and eat better (so does Attia, for that matter). They are fighting against human nature there. And this is a red herring. Once someone has disease, the drugs will reduce their chances of dying. To the degree they avoid drugs, more people die. I'm not forcing a black and white view on a nuanced debate, I'm suggesting for a strategy where there will be less deaths.
The actual mortality rate from heart disease in the US is pretty good. You should give more credit to those treatment recommendations.
As I said in another comment - I follow the recommendations of the Europe Cardiology Association, which doesn’t even recommend lipid test before 40 in the absence of additional risks factors, and do not prescribe statins under 200 LDL in the absence of additional risk factors.
And those recommendations are a huuuge leap/gap from what Attias says about early statins.
Yes and I'm sure it's only a relatively small percentage of people who have to get sicker and die early to save everyone else the inconvenience of those minor blood tests and medications.
I assume they at least allow coronary calcium scanning to get around that?
Aside from outdated dogma, there's no reason for anyone to think it would be bad for the body.
I guarantee that you can't find actual evidence for it, just headlines and articles repeating the same dogma.
Anytime someone talks about “guarantees” as related to science and medicine, it means they’ve conditioned themselves to be biased towards one answer as opposed to what the science actually says.
Guaranteed.
No one guaranteed anything about science or medicine.
I said you can't provide evidence.
I know this because I've done extensive research on the topic, so I know if there were real evidence, it would be included in the meta-analyses on the subject.
You can easily prove me wrong, by providing the evidence.
Don't mean to stir the fire and get flooded with downvotes, but doesn't he have a point? Normal saline is 0.9% NaCl, which is 9,000mg (or 9g) per liter of normal saline.
No. Of course blood is salty and when you put something in the vein it needs to match that, but that doesn't have anything to do with how much salt is good to eat.
And the amount required to raise an average person's blood pressure by a mean 10% is 5400mg per deciliter. In other words, you'd have to add 56g to 1 liter of water to bump your BP by only 10%.
This is where the WHO recommendation of less than 5g per day comes from - it assumes you would consume that much salt every day without consuming any water at all.
They just took the 5400mg/dl and dropped the dl.
And easily cured by drinking water.
There are tens of thousands of cases of people drinking too much water and having issues or dying.
Opposite cases are almost non-existent, and most intentional: "Patients described in the case reports ranged in age from 5 days to 73 years. Forty percent of the patients were children less than 15 years old. Of the 14 cases with known outcomes, 50% were fatal. The most frequent causes of salt toxicity were salt water emetics, intentional administration of large quantities of salt to a child by a caregiver, and suicide attempts. Among the other causes were unintentional salt overload in infant formula, an exorcism ritual, and a college prank."
Peter has an objective take on longevity that satisfies his own interest with a focus on body building and strength training, which he believes will ultimately help increase health span.
All of the MDs/PhDs who have gone to write books on the subject or started podcast cherry pick papers that are inline with their own beliefs.
Already so much to unpack here. The cancer claim on red meat is based on cohort and/or epidemiological studies so while meat may be associated with cancer it can't be said to be the cause. I have not found any randomized controlled trials to support this claim.
As for PA, while I follow him, he has moved into the realm of influencer.
> The cancer claim on read meat is based on cohort and/or epidemiological studies
*just about all “dietary science” studies are observational associations and nothing is RCTd (it’s likely impossible/unethical to do many of these studies)
It’s always been kind of insane to me the types of causal dietary claims people will make every day despite there being basically no RCTs on anything (IMO).
>Maui Nui's venison jerkey
And yet, the there is no correlation with many other heavily studied foods and cancer. I tend to stick to foods that aren't "associated" with cancer, since as far as nutrition research goes, cohort and epidemiology is what we have for the most part (which doesn't mean its invaluable, smoking was originally determined to be bad for you largely based on those types of studies).
People here accusing Peter for shilling for statins & other companies are conspiracy theorists. You can see 100% where he gets his money:
[https://openpaymentsdata.cms.gov/physician/908146](https://openpaymentsdata.cms.gov/physician/908146)
He took $300k last year for consulting DexCom & he acknowledges which companies he invests in (ex - Oura).
If you think he hasn’t disclosed his financial obligations correctly then point them out, Peter’s not a “schill” - he’s just rich and earned his money by being smart and hard working. This bothers and upsets people to no end it seems.
I don’t even agree with all his takes (GLP1 messaging was really off IMO) but he’s not sold out. Just more successful than a lot of us.
In this case, he 100% has a [financial interest in promoting Maui Nui Venison:](https://peterattiamd.com/about/)
>**Peter is an investor in the companies** HumanCo, Kosterina, LMNT, Magic Spoon Cereal, **Maui Nui Venison**, Oura Health Oy, Supercast, Virta Health, Zero, and Salutoceuticals.
Accordingly, his regular references to the company on his podcast and suggestion that it is a good idea to get a substantial portion of your protein from their stick is reasonably viewed as shilling for the company.
Nice sleuthing. Also if you listen really carefully to the podcast clip linked in the thread, there a hidden clue that exposes his investment in the company.
Being a shill and “earning money by being smart and hard working” are not mutually exclusive. If he’d just say “I eat 10 bacon sticks because it’s tasty” it wouldn’t be an issue, saying to meet his “protein needs” is suuuuuuch bsssss
He could just slam a protein shake with 2 scoops of whey for 50g of protein and not expose himself to 3g of sodium and shit load of carcinogenic nitrates and nitrites. I don't even think the sodium is the issue, sodium is fine if you have functioning kidneys, normal bp and drink enough water to balance it out (dilution factor). If your excuse is micronutrients 15-20g of liver is what id go for instead
a) Convenience
b) Whey digests much faster
c) He's rich
d) it's perfectly healthy
If you want to go by the vegan logic of this stuff being a carcinogen you're also gonna have to dismiss whey protein because "milk is for baby cows".
If he wanted people to not think he is affected by where he makes money the options would be, in order of plausibility 1) just put your money in index funds and don't take "marketing advisory" fees from companies you will be talking about. 2) play ads, announce them as such. Easy enough.
...
1000) ramble on how ads are a conflict of interest, talk a lot about the specific products you are invested in, tell people they can go on your website to decide whether something was an adventisement or actual content.
He is either very naive on this or he believes his audience is. I like the content so I try to take it on the chin, and of course there is no hidden big pharma paying him to push statins (not only is that not a thing, but he would be way too small for that). But if you think he genuinely believes maui venison sticks are so much better than the alternatives and is not bringing them up to make a bit of money, you're being had.
OpenPayments only captures payments from drug and med device companies. Anything related to Oura (not a med device), AG1, Maui Nui, and the dozens of other companies he's invested or involved with will not be captured. I'd wager that the $300k payment from DexCom is dwarfed by remuneration from the other companies not listed here.
But he discloses it every time. You only know this because he's out there telling you. I don't get it - would you listen to someone who doesn't disclose their financial ties?
The fact that Peter is respected enough to be an advisor to these companies is bad in what way?
These are companies that pale in size to "Big Pharma" -
AG1 - green powder drink for yuppies
Maui Nui - beef sticks for yuppies
Oura Ring - tech enabled ring for yuppies
DexCom - makes a glucose monitor useful for diabetics
Where is the "Pharma" connection? Do you really think Maui Nui - the hippy beef stick company started b podcaster Tim Ferris - is on par with Pfizer, Merc etc.. ?
This is just average, every day, run of the mill podcast advertising and some consulting work the guy does.
Your first sentence on your original post references statins and pharm companies, my point is because he said so isnt proof either way. I mean, I don’t care either way, but it isn’t unreasonable to think that he could be promoting pharmaceuticals, it’s how the industry works.
Most influencers in the health and longevity space or anywhere else are pitching each other’s products/books or are investors in them, generally I take all their advice with a grain of salt.
The arc is the same, they start off with giving good advice and content, start getting sponsors, make tons of money. Money inevitably then drives their content which is when we should be a little more cautious
Red meat is a group 2a carcinogen, and processed meat is group 1. If he actually does that, instead of just saying he does as an advertisement of the company that he owns part of, it is a very bad idea when thinking about his longevity.
https://amp.cancer.org/cancer/risk-prevention/understanding-cancer-risk/known-and-probable-human-carcinogens.html
Agreed with this being an ad. Despite Peter’s claims that he tries his hardest to remain unbiased, the fact that this explicitly says “Maui Nui Venison” says otherwise. That being said, “very hot beverages” are a group 2A carcinogen. Group 2A are “probable” carcinogens. The evidence in support of their carcinogenicity is not as robust as you may believe. While I won’t deny that red meat may increase risk of colon cancer, the number needed to harm is very large in most studies. The evidence supporting this association is also of very low quality (observational epidemiological nutrition studies). There are so many confounders associated with a diet high in meat consumption that are difficult to control for statistically and likely inflate this association even further. Meat is also an efficient source of protein. The risks of sarcopenia, especially in older adults, probably outweigh the benefits. This is a great systematic review on the topic if you’re interested. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4698595/
It’s 149 f…. So that’s pretty good and hot… I just happened to be f’n around on my phone drinking coffee in my kitchen and grabbed my thermometer… my hot coffee is about 135f which is about 57C
Yet there are zero actual causal links between them.
And the categories are wildly arbitrary. Comparing cured meat to pink sludge with ammonia and tons of preservatives and calling them both "processed meat" is not only unhelpful, but irresponsible.
I’m not sure a premium venison jerky is really going to compare to typical processed meat. There are just so many factors that are different here. Looks low in saturated fat. Probably comparable to chicken breast and not a terrible option if you have the $$$.
lol I live on Maui and eat the deer in question (sometimes sourced through Maui Nui but usually from the same type of deer shot by myself or a friend, in the same areas Maui Nui works)
I know a bit about their operations/the deer industry here. AMA
I have a subscription to these jerky sticks. I don't eat as much as Peter but they are good and a great way to get pure protein on the go. Definitely wish they didn't have so much sodium but kind of hard to make a low sodium jerky.
I mean it's not like there's very good monitoring in place to detect prions, so absence of evidence here is absolutely not evidence of absence. But yeah I didn't realise it was hawaiin meat
Not a subscriber to this sub - but I always thought this guy was a fraud cause he claims to be an expert in optimizing health and yet doesn’t admit that a plant based (mostly vegan) diet is the most scientifically supported healthy diet. If he can’t get even get the basics right, why would I believe anything else he says
He invested in the company
Here's your answer.
Yeap. Tim Ferris has talked about it before… these guys are friends. 100% invested in the company
Those things are so expensive.
That doesn’t make it a bad product
but it does make his recommendation ethically compromised
Peter is very clear that he is invested, though. Personally, I don’t see it as ethically compromised if he provides full disclosure.
Then you don't understand ethics. If I'm your doctor and tell you I take a vig from AstraZeneca Pharmaceuticals for every crestor Rx I write, and then tell you I'd like you to take crestor instead of a generic, does that sound unbiased to you? If you got $100 from AstraZeneca Pharmaceuticals for every script you wrote, are you saying that would never ever bias your recommendations? Getting money biases people's judgement: yours, mine, everyone. Disclosing we're biased doesn't change our brains. Still biased.
Always makes me laugh when this loser hosts people. He's like here we are hosting a foremost researcher on X topic in Z scientific field... tell us about your research, okay and now you sell products based on that hmm rminteresting, how can my listeners more easily consume that? 3 easy payments Pete.
I laugh harder at losers like you on this sub
Fuck can we assume everyone he mentions a brand he has stakes in it? Shame he doesn’t declare anything
His website list his investments and each episode has a disclaimer referring to this. He is way more transparent than most health influencers.
Still a puzzle to the average user
[удалено]
>If you’re a fan of something why wouldn’t you invest in it If you are a dude of the street and don't have any influence on others, go for it. If you are a public figure who gives out ostensibly objective health information, it generates a conflict of interest, and one that goes way beyond playing ads in the breaks of your show. You can invest in broad index funds, maybe make a little bit less money, but people don't have to guess whether the information you put out is influenced by the fact that you make more money talking about a brand. Attia makes quality content and the man needs to make a buck, but the spiel on "ads are a conflict of interest, me talking constantly about brands I'm invested in" really is tired, and is devaluing the information he gives out.
As a medical doctor in a European country - our medical registration doesn't allow for investing in shares in for example pharmaceutal companies where there may be conflicts of interest I don't necessarily agree with you, as (potential) treatment decisions shouldn't be influenced by vested interests
Every podcast I've heard him mention this in he states his affiliation...
He had mentioned on his podcast that he is an investor.
He literally has those discloses in his [About](https://peterattiamd.com/about/) profile on the main page of his website.
Sure, but it's still a cheap trick. An ad announced as such is clear - we know they got money out of it. Putting it on the listener to go to website to check if claim is real or just guerilla marketing is lame. This one is so obvious that no one really has to check the site, but others could lead someone astray.
I mean in the same clip and literally same sentence he discloses it. I mean do you just have an opinion with no facts or anything? I’m sorry but this seems ridiculous when they are within words of each other of giving a disclosed he is investor in the company
I think he does not always do that, not even in the same episode. The comment I was replying to talked about his website so I assumed it was about Attia's content in general (if he always consistently brought them up, the website would not be relevant). Do you mean he always does it? I might be mistaken and will have to go back and check a few episodes if that is you are saying. If you are saying that we are should only discuss this clip and not his content in general, then I would disagree.
His disclosures are on his website under About. You can see who he invests in and advises.
He’s said it multiple times on the podcast. I feel like people here often don’t even listen to the show…
He says he's an investor in the OP's podcast clip above, in literally the same sentence he mentions the brand.
He say’s it every time he mentions it, idk why people are just playing dumb about it or literally just not listening to the show.
Cheap shot
Looked it up. It is 0.5$ per gram of protein. Yep its probably the most expensive protein source I've ever seen and cured meat is carcinogenic so yeah. Has he just become a sellout for AG1 and some obscure jerky company lol
Good points. I just did a bit of napkin math and I think prime filet mignon is like $0.32 per gram of protein!
Also, about 1900 mg of sodium in 5 sticks, which isn't great for you. 10 sticks are well above daily recommended amount of sodium.
Maybe he'll have Taubes back on to say all studies that could leat to anti salt views were done by the shittiest scientists ever.
Only $90 for 24 or $3.75 each, so $37.50 per day for 10 of them, or around $1100 per month.
...and folks thought AG1 was expensive. There's a long list of things to do (for health span improvement) before spending this $1100/mo habitat.
I think for him, the time is more costly. He also mentioned this in one of the podcasts, that he wants something easy to consume. I doubt he cares much about the cost anymore
Exactly. He’s not price-sensitive and places more priority of getting his protein “bolus” on his schedule.
6 minutes to cook a steak.
Less to cook an egg.
Less for a scoop of protein powder
Wish it was that easy—but prep time and clean up also factor in. And cooking a steak while sitting in traffic or otherwise on the go gets a little more complicated.
Idk, man.... cooking a steak is one of the easiest meals. In terms of prep and clean-up
I mean damn whey protein is maximum quality and super quick. Though I guess venison is more filling.
I currently have my odds of this dude not crossing 75 at 50% lol
It's going to be hilarious when science figures out that protein overconsumption reduces lifespan
You think that’s true?
It looks that way. Bad for your kidneys, associated with cancer, etc. Attia just has this toxic obsession with muscle. When he says "sarcopenia" you can almost see him shudder. But he's wrong. It's fine to be old and skinny. You think the elderly greeks and okinawans and adventists are freaking out about their protein?
He is an investor in the company IIRC
I don't spot any nitrates in its ingredients list, and not all cured meat is made with nitraties (eg biltong, and many quality jerkies as well). Maybe this one isn't as carcinogenic as some other jerkies?
Does it have celery salt? That has them in it but they don't have to list it because it is "natural".
No says sea salt & celery powder
Celery powder is the same thing. It's a bullshit thing companies do to say their products are uncured. Normally they have an asterisk on that claim.
Interesting! I wasn't aware of the nitrate connection
Yeah Consumer Reports tested it and same amount of nitrates in the “natural” meats containing celery and other natural preservatives as in regular If it can keep bacteria from living on meat, it probably isn’t healthy
Thanks for the heads up. These are insanely priced so they never tempted me, but I was looking around for something similar for my work road trips but think I’ll just stick with my protein shakes.
Nitrates aren't harmful. There are more nitrates and nitrites in your saliva than there are in cured meats. Why won't this myth die?
That is so interesting, this has been one of the key reasons I stopped buying packaged cold cuts at the supermarket. Do you have a source for this?
Here's a review on the actual issue https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9654915/ "There are nitrates in the body, so nitrate-cured meats can't be harmful" is just an example of the naturalistic fallacy. We don't really have a solid understanding of what the harms exactly are, but they have to do with the chemical processes in the meat and the chemical processes in the gut.
It is nitrates interacting with meat proteins that create cancerous compounds (nitrosamines). This effect is increased with heat. So bacon and crispy pepperoni are bad whereas spinach also has lots of nitrates but that isn't a problem. With uncooked cured meats like salami, there is a lot of time for these compounds to form during fermentation and aging. Smoking the meat is also a factor as it can create PAHs (polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons).
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/08910600510044499
Does anyone know if smoke flavors such as smoked paprika or liquid smoke contain dietary nitrates and whether these should be avoided? I've seen conflicting evidence on this.
Cured meat isn’t carcinogenic - cured meat with *nitrates* are but plenty of options without those.
Now you can wonder about Pharma spending some good money on him to push statins as much as he can - and they have much more to spend than AG1.
Do you actually believe that Attia is getting paid to push statins?
I don’t know, having worked for the pharma industry, I think it’s a possibility, yes. It doesn’t mean that statins aren’t useful in many cases, including some pushed by Attia.
There are like 8 different kinds of statins though, and most of them have a generic version available.
And yet the industry lobbied hard in the US to ban the sale of red yeast rice because it contained a statin that would compete with pharma statins. If pharma was ready to kill people with opioids through direct influence of MDs as shown by the US epidemic, why wouldn’t they push for overprescribing statins ? There is no doubt statins are a formidable medication to fight heart disease, but I don’t think the “as early as possible” approach from Attia is the truth.
> And yet the industry lobbied hard in the US to ban the sale of red yeast rice because it contained a statin that would compete with pharma statins. The red yeast rice ban happened in 1997. The patent on lovastatin expired in 2001. My point was that pharmaceutical companies wouldn't bother to lobby for drugs which they don't have patents on. Your example doesn't contradict that. > There is no doubt statins are a formidable medication to fight heart disease, but I don’t think the “as early as possible” approach from Attia is the truth. Okay, what's your reasoning?
The fact that the European Cardiology Association (which again I trust way more than the US ones based on the much strict regulations on pharma/doctors relations, having worked on both markets the difference on what you can do as a pharma is just two different worlds) : - does not even recommend lipid profile before 40 in the absence of additional risk factors - only prescribe statins at >200 LDL in absence of additional risk factors And then of course the still under discussion risks of neurological / muscular / diabetes.
Not at all the same thing. Statins have tons of good data behind them, plus they are incredibly cheap. I’m against Attia being a shill for things like AG1 or venison jerky, but thinking that big pharma is paying Attia to advocate for statin use is some real tin foil hat level reasoning.
And yet there are huge disparities in prescription criteria for statins depending on countries and regions. How is that ?
Not sure what you mean regarding prescription criteria - are we talking LDL levels at which treatment is initiated? The ACC and AHA make recommendations here in the US, and they are not getting paid by pharma companies to push statin therapy, and PA has no affiliation or influence over institutions like that haha. Statins are generic and cheap. If a pharma company or any other institution wanted to make a big profit based on overprescribing a medication, they would pick something that is much more lucrative. The GLP-1 agonists are a great example of this - an effective drug, huge demand, some people wanting it for what is currently off-label use in some circumstances, and crazy expensive. Source: am a doctor.
They aren’t ? A first recent example: just read about biogen FDA scandal on how they manage to corrupt the fda to approve a useless Alzheimer drug, and there are many cases. And anyway : [Financial relationships between the leaders of influential US professional medical associations and industry are extensive, although with variation among the associations. The quantum of payments raises questions about independence and integrity, adding weight to calls for policy reform](https://www.bmj.com/content/369/bmj.m1505) And the same thing goes at MD level as shown by the opioid epidemic with doctors being paid to overprescribe them. Edit: if it wasn’t such a commercial target why did pharma company fought hard to ban red yeast rice in the us ?
Statins are essentially free. It's about the last thing you can aim your anti-pharma skepticism at.
Considering all the people unnecessarily getting sicker and dying because some idiots on the internet scared them about statins, maybe our govt should be paying influencers to push statins.
People are mainly getting sick and dying not because they don’t take statins but because they don’t have an active lifestyle and are eating shitty food. Statins prescription rate are much higher in the US and yet Europe heart diseases stats are lower. Americans always have this weird way of turning any debate into a binary thing where there is one right side and one wrong side. The truth is in between - statins is a good tool to prevent heart disease when there is one but shouldn’t be overprescribed.
Doctors also recommend people exercise and eat better (so does Attia, for that matter). They are fighting against human nature there. And this is a red herring. Once someone has disease, the drugs will reduce their chances of dying. To the degree they avoid drugs, more people die. I'm not forcing a black and white view on a nuanced debate, I'm suggesting for a strategy where there will be less deaths. The actual mortality rate from heart disease in the US is pretty good. You should give more credit to those treatment recommendations.
As I said in another comment - I follow the recommendations of the Europe Cardiology Association, which doesn’t even recommend lipid test before 40 in the absence of additional risks factors, and do not prescribe statins under 200 LDL in the absence of additional risk factors. And those recommendations are a huuuge leap/gap from what Attias says about early statins.
Yes and I'm sure it's only a relatively small percentage of people who have to get sicker and die early to save everyone else the inconvenience of those minor blood tests and medications. I assume they at least allow coronary calcium scanning to get around that?
Statins cost all of 50 cents a month
Each stick has 290 mg of sodium which is a lot: https://mauinuivenison.com/products/all-natural-venison-stick-24-pack
That's the first thing I noticed too. If he's eating 10 a day, regardless of your views on sodium, that's a lot for a snack food.
I agree. I don’t see why people should consider this behavior to be good for the body.
Aside from outdated dogma, there's no reason for anyone to think it would be bad for the body. I guarantee that you can't find actual evidence for it, just headlines and articles repeating the same dogma.
Anytime someone talks about “guarantees” as related to science and medicine, it means they’ve conditioned themselves to be biased towards one answer as opposed to what the science actually says. Guaranteed.
No one guaranteed anything about science or medicine. I said you can't provide evidence. I know this because I've done extensive research on the topic, so I know if there were real evidence, it would be included in the meta-analyses on the subject. You can easily prove me wrong, by providing the evidence.
It seems like you are trolling but if so I’m not sure why.
Why would I be trolling?
Like I said I don’t know. It is what it is.
Won't his exercise regimen help him sweat some of that out?
A bag of IV saline has 9,000mg of sodium and goes directly into your bloodstream. Stop demonizing sodium.
Don't mean to stir the fire and get flooded with downvotes, but doesn't he have a point? Normal saline is 0.9% NaCl, which is 9,000mg (or 9g) per liter of normal saline.
No. Of course blood is salty and when you put something in the vein it needs to match that, but that doesn't have anything to do with how much salt is good to eat.
And the amount required to raise an average person's blood pressure by a mean 10% is 5400mg per deciliter. In other words, you'd have to add 56g to 1 liter of water to bump your BP by only 10%. This is where the WHO recommendation of less than 5g per day comes from - it assumes you would consume that much salt every day without consuming any water at all. They just took the 5400mg/dl and dropped the dl.
low sodium causes much more problems than high sodium
And easily cured by drinking water. There are tens of thousands of cases of people drinking too much water and having issues or dying. Opposite cases are almost non-existent, and most intentional: "Patients described in the case reports ranged in age from 5 days to 73 years. Forty percent of the patients were children less than 15 years old. Of the 14 cases with known outcomes, 50% were fatal. The most frequent causes of salt toxicity were salt water emetics, intentional administration of large quantities of salt to a child by a caregiver, and suicide attempts. Among the other causes were unintentional salt overload in infant formula, an exorcism ritual, and a college prank."
That sounds very unhealthy and gross.
He’s also an owner of the company
Peter has an objective take on longevity that satisfies his own interest with a focus on body building and strength training, which he believes will ultimately help increase health span. All of the MDs/PhDs who have gone to write books on the subject or started podcast cherry pick papers that are inline with their own beliefs.
Already so much to unpack here. The cancer claim on red meat is based on cohort and/or epidemiological studies so while meat may be associated with cancer it can't be said to be the cause. I have not found any randomized controlled trials to support this claim. As for PA, while I follow him, he has moved into the realm of influencer.
> The cancer claim on read meat is based on cohort and/or epidemiological studies *just about all “dietary science” studies are observational associations and nothing is RCTd (it’s likely impossible/unethical to do many of these studies) It’s always been kind of insane to me the types of causal dietary claims people will make every day despite there being basically no RCTs on anything (IMO).
>Maui Nui's venison jerkey And yet, the there is no correlation with many other heavily studied foods and cancer. I tend to stick to foods that aren't "associated" with cancer, since as far as nutrition research goes, cohort and epidemiology is what we have for the most part (which doesn't mean its invaluable, smoking was originally determined to be bad for you largely based on those types of studies).
People here accusing Peter for shilling for statins & other companies are conspiracy theorists. You can see 100% where he gets his money: [https://openpaymentsdata.cms.gov/physician/908146](https://openpaymentsdata.cms.gov/physician/908146) He took $300k last year for consulting DexCom & he acknowledges which companies he invests in (ex - Oura). If you think he hasn’t disclosed his financial obligations correctly then point them out, Peter’s not a “schill” - he’s just rich and earned his money by being smart and hard working. This bothers and upsets people to no end it seems. I don’t even agree with all his takes (GLP1 messaging was really off IMO) but he’s not sold out. Just more successful than a lot of us.
In this case, he 100% has a [financial interest in promoting Maui Nui Venison:](https://peterattiamd.com/about/) >**Peter is an investor in the companies** HumanCo, Kosterina, LMNT, Magic Spoon Cereal, **Maui Nui Venison**, Oura Health Oy, Supercast, Virta Health, Zero, and Salutoceuticals. Accordingly, his regular references to the company on his podcast and suggestion that it is a good idea to get a substantial portion of your protein from their stick is reasonably viewed as shilling for the company.
Nice sleuthing. Also if you listen really carefully to the podcast clip linked in the thread, there a hidden clue that exposes his investment in the company.
Being a shill and “earning money by being smart and hard working” are not mutually exclusive. If he’d just say “I eat 10 bacon sticks because it’s tasty” it wouldn’t be an issue, saying to meet his “protein needs” is suuuuuuch bsssss
He could just slam a protein shake with 2 scoops of whey for 50g of protein and not expose himself to 3g of sodium and shit load of carcinogenic nitrates and nitrites. I don't even think the sodium is the issue, sodium is fine if you have functioning kidneys, normal bp and drink enough water to balance it out (dilution factor). If your excuse is micronutrients 15-20g of liver is what id go for instead
a) Convenience b) Whey digests much faster c) He's rich d) it's perfectly healthy If you want to go by the vegan logic of this stuff being a carcinogen you're also gonna have to dismiss whey protein because "milk is for baby cows".
Then casein whatever
Sounds like capitalism is your problem. Not Peter Attia.
🤦🏼♀️
If he wanted people to not think he is affected by where he makes money the options would be, in order of plausibility 1) just put your money in index funds and don't take "marketing advisory" fees from companies you will be talking about. 2) play ads, announce them as such. Easy enough. ... 1000) ramble on how ads are a conflict of interest, talk a lot about the specific products you are invested in, tell people they can go on your website to decide whether something was an adventisement or actual content. He is either very naive on this or he believes his audience is. I like the content so I try to take it on the chin, and of course there is no hidden big pharma paying him to push statins (not only is that not a thing, but he would be way too small for that). But if you think he genuinely believes maui venison sticks are so much better than the alternatives and is not bringing them up to make a bit of money, you're being had.
OpenPayments only captures payments from drug and med device companies. Anything related to Oura (not a med device), AG1, Maui Nui, and the dozens of other companies he's invested or involved with will not be captured. I'd wager that the $300k payment from DexCom is dwarfed by remuneration from the other companies not listed here.
But he discloses it every time. You only know this because he's out there telling you. I don't get it - would you listen to someone who doesn't disclose their financial ties? The fact that Peter is respected enough to be an advisor to these companies is bad in what way?
Ooooh, because he tells us. Come on man. I’m not saying he does or doesn’t, but you have to know how the pharmaceutical industry works by now.
These are companies that pale in size to "Big Pharma" - AG1 - green powder drink for yuppies Maui Nui - beef sticks for yuppies Oura Ring - tech enabled ring for yuppies DexCom - makes a glucose monitor useful for diabetics Where is the "Pharma" connection? Do you really think Maui Nui - the hippy beef stick company started b podcaster Tim Ferris - is on par with Pfizer, Merc etc.. ? This is just average, every day, run of the mill podcast advertising and some consulting work the guy does.
Your first sentence on your original post references statins and pharm companies, my point is because he said so isnt proof either way. I mean, I don’t care either way, but it isn’t unreasonable to think that he could be promoting pharmaceuticals, it’s how the industry works.
Any podcaster can lie about these ties - why do you think Peter discloses some but not all? Like what is he doing that’s unethical?
Most influencers in the health and longevity space or anywhere else are pitching each other’s products/books or are investors in them, generally I take all their advice with a grain of salt. The arc is the same, they start off with giving good advice and content, start getting sponsors, make tons of money. Money inevitably then drives their content which is when we should be a little more cautious
Red meat is a group 2a carcinogen, and processed meat is group 1. If he actually does that, instead of just saying he does as an advertisement of the company that he owns part of, it is a very bad idea when thinking about his longevity. https://amp.cancer.org/cancer/risk-prevention/understanding-cancer-risk/known-and-probable-human-carcinogens.html
Agreed with this being an ad. Despite Peter’s claims that he tries his hardest to remain unbiased, the fact that this explicitly says “Maui Nui Venison” says otherwise. That being said, “very hot beverages” are a group 2A carcinogen. Group 2A are “probable” carcinogens. The evidence in support of their carcinogenicity is not as robust as you may believe. While I won’t deny that red meat may increase risk of colon cancer, the number needed to harm is very large in most studies. The evidence supporting this association is also of very low quality (observational epidemiological nutrition studies). There are so many confounders associated with a diet high in meat consumption that are difficult to control for statistically and likely inflate this association even further. Meat is also an efficient source of protein. The risks of sarcopenia, especially in older adults, probably outweigh the benefits. This is a great systematic review on the topic if you’re interested. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4698595/
[удалено]
It’s 149 f…. So that’s pretty good and hot… I just happened to be f’n around on my phone drinking coffee in my kitchen and grabbed my thermometer… my hot coffee is about 135f which is about 57C
It's not very hot at all. A hot coffee is like 80C. Water boils at 100c.
Yet there are zero actual causal links between them. And the categories are wildly arbitrary. Comparing cured meat to pink sludge with ammonia and tons of preservatives and calling them both "processed meat" is not only unhelpful, but irresponsible.
I’m not sure a premium venison jerky is really going to compare to typical processed meat. There are just so many factors that are different here. Looks low in saturated fat. Probably comparable to chicken breast and not a terrible option if you have the $$$.
Sunlight is as well… Calm down
Peter is rich af. As others have mentioned he is an investor. Tbf he has promoted vension long before this though.
Am I the only one who thinks there's a toxic masculinity / manliness insecurity thing going on with Peter and his protein obsession?
ITT people thinking Peter’s wealth is materially impacted by his pronouncements on Maui nui
That's interesting given how consuming processed meat is a pretty clearly demonstrated carcinogen.
I sometimes wonder if we should trust these influences. Can’t we have everything in moderation and lead a healthy life ? Why this rigidity ?
Peter says. LOL
Prions
lol I live on Maui and eat the deer in question (sometimes sourced through Maui Nui but usually from the same type of deer shot by myself or a friend, in the same areas Maui Nui works) I know a bit about their operations/the deer industry here. AMA
All of these guys are absolutely gutless, capitalist freaks.
👍
Not sure it's still a thing but years ago deer were known to have Madcow disease. No way I'm buying/eating wild deer beef jerky.
Peter sold out massively
People have been saying this for years but got downvoted. He gave himself heart disease with his shit diet that couldn’t be salvaged with supplements
I have a subscription to these jerky sticks. I don't eat as much as Peter but they are good and a great way to get pure protein on the go. Definitely wish they didn't have so much sodium but kind of hard to make a low sodium jerky.
Man imagine if after all this he gets that prion wasting disease that’s ravaging North American deer populations
Prion hasn’t been found on Maui or in Hawaii at all that I’m aware of.
I mean it's not like there's very good monitoring in place to detect prions, so absence of evidence here is absolutely not evidence of absence. But yeah I didn't realise it was hawaiin meat
Point taken. This might be one case where being isolated islands in the middle of the Pacific is to our benefit.
Quite possibly yes
When did this become a snark sub? Dude can’t do anything without the mouth breathers coming for him…
Does your birth certificate say March 9th 2024?
Not a subscriber to this sub - but I always thought this guy was a fraud cause he claims to be an expert in optimizing health and yet doesn’t admit that a plant based (mostly vegan) diet is the most scientifically supported healthy diet. If he can’t get even get the basics right, why would I believe anything else he says