Great episode on male hormones. Will being a female version soon.

THis was fantastic one on sugar.

Thee was SO much blatantly false misinformation in that episode. Huberman should have never given that quack a platform.

Go watch this.

TXTransplant said:

---

Thee was SO much blatantly false misinformation in that episode. Huberman should have never given that quack a platform.

Go watch this.

---

I will. Huberman usually so thorough

This is the interview Huberman should have done. But even Dr. Lyon wants ti demonize fructose over glucose. The point they all miss, is that, if you eat a healthy diet focused on proteins and DON'T over-consume calories in the form of carbs/sugars/fats (ie, processed foods), you don't have to worry about what happens to fructose or glucose in your body. You simply won't be eating enough of it to induce fatty liver disease or diabetes.

https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-dr-gabrielle-lyon-show/id1622316426?i=1000641843148

You can tell, though, she is really trying to get this guy to get out over his skis and make some pretty bold extrapolative claims about his research. And he flat out refuses. But we all know it's the outlandish claims (like Lustig makes) that get clicks, views, and listens.

I did like how calories are different for different foods. I heard that before about 1000 calories of protein isn't 1000 calories of carbs.

Yeah, due to thermogenesis.

That's actually when I stopped listening, though, because they both WAY overstate the numbers. Lustig "guesses" 25%, and then Huberman goes on to say a 1600 calorie steak is more like 750 calories. Even if the 25% estimate is correct, 25% of 1600 is NOT 750.

If a 1600 calorie steak was really only 750 calories, no one would be obese.

I actually submitted a note on Huberman's website about that. It was egregiously misleading.

You think people are fat because of steak?

People are fat because they eat too many calories.

IMO, the podcast didn't clearly articulate the concept of thermogenesis. It just made it sound like your body doesn't "use" all the calories in food. While that may be true, it's absurd to tell people that only 750 calories of a 1600 calorie steak are taken in by the body. 1) that's not true, and 2) if it were (ie, 60% of calories we eat go to thermogenesis) we wouldn't have an obesity problem. I'm using that as an example of why that part of the podcast was so ridiculous.

Point is, he drastically overstated this idea that some calories are wasted to "prove" his calories in doesn't equal calories out and calorie deficits don't work arguments. He didn't prove anything - he's just spreading misinformation.

The other point they totally ignored is the thermic effect of food is irrelevant if you are eating way more calories than your body needs (because you are still eating too many calories). I guess maybe if 100% of your calories can from protein, it wouldn't matter, but that's unrealistic.

I thought it was about 30% for steak, not less than half. I don't remember them stating it that low

Lustig estimated 25%. Which for protein and protein alone is probably a fine estimate. But he didn't state that number was just for protein, so it sounds like he's saying that's the case for all foods. Fat and carbs have a much, much lower thermic effect. And steak is not 100% protein.

He was using this to justify his argument that calories in/calories out isn't true, but people don't eat 100% protein, so it's very misleading.

Then Huberman took that 25% estimate and applied it to his hypothetical 1600 calorie steak and somehow came up with the "only 750 calories". Lustig agreed with him. Clearly, they both stink at basic math.