I asked four state medical boards if Dr. Mark Hyman's promotion of supplements he profits from violates state laws. California and Ohio said they would investigate; Massachusetts may; Texas won't.
He’s on the list of pseudoscientists. We all need to do our due diligence and not just believe everything we’re fed. I realise if we hear the same thing over and over and over again we begin to believe it. This is a time not to.
You're, of course, right about the need to do individual due diligence...and about the human proclivity to absorb a continuously repeated message as somehow-maybe-possibly acceptably accurate. That's the seam between actual fact and asserted claim where longevity chiselers live, hoping consumers accept the ready list of citations of research reports as evidence of proof. But if all the research papers about the supplement were paid for, conducted and written by the company that makes the supplement the doctor is pitching to you....
Wow I’m writing about Mitopure this week too (had never heard of it until a few weeks ago). A skincare company is now using it in cream form. Great article. I need to figure out if derms need to be held to this standard. So many of them shill products and don’t disclose
Cheryl, it sure seems that the so-called Mitopure "gold standard" of RCTs is defined as "a bunch of studies we paid our own employees & consultants to conduct on our own product." Derms are state-licensed MDs, of course. If they lean on Timeline's marketing schtick, they're not giving the straight story.
Thanks for exposing this long time grifter. My poor wife in her early days of dementia felt he was gonna be her savior for every medical ailment she had. And while I've gotten some good info from Andrew Huberman, his hawking of AG1 and LMNT among others have caused me to no longer listen.
Tom, I'm sorry to hear about your wife's negative experience with this provider. To your point, many clinical professionals give some accurate and helpful advice. But if they mix in other, unverified, self-dealing information that isn't accurate, they've shit the professional bed—if you'll excuse the language—and forfeited public trust. And that's simply and permanently unacceptable.
There is a Dennis Crouse who has researched alzheimers and aluminium and has good results with silica water. Info on YouTube. I have no affiliation with any of this but just giving you the info should you wish to follow it up.
The MD suffix is powerful. It works on me — suggests that the speaker might have valid information (I know I’m stating the obvious). So it’s infuriating that Dr. Hyman is abusing his status in this way. I appreciate your research here Paul Z. I feel newly inspired and fortified to detect and resist snake oil peddlers!
Judy, it's very powerful and persuasive, and using it shamelessly and cynically is heartbreaking in a way because, really, how many professions are still regarded by the public as deserving of trust? Doctors remain in that realm, for now. But relentlessly promoting unproven supplements in which you likely have a financial interest is devastating to that remaining public trust.
I'm so glad you wrote this because, like others here, I'm so tired of these grifters getting away with shilling their snake oil. I've bought into it in the past and lost plenty of money for it, too. Luckily I've wisened up but - as the saying goes: There's a sucker born every minute.
Heather, it's human nature to want to believe doctors who sound earnest, personal and scientifically backed. That's what makes this particular doctor effective and his business practices troubling to so many consumers. The good thing nowadays is you can ask any competent free AI to evaluate this doctor's or any doctor's claims about anything he or they are selling, and you'll get a fairly thorough read on what's actually what.
With caution. AI gets things wrong and commercial LLMs still have a predisposition to reinforce what you want them to say. Medical LLMs are strongly biased towards standard guidelines and status quo, some new research - especially research that overturns standard care - gets taken up very slowly.
An excellent and well-taken call out, Dr. Stein. i should have been more careful in how I wrote my comment. To your point, commercial AI models do tend to cheer on its user's POV sometimes (not always, but enough to not be taken at its word all the time), and even my $100/mo version of Claude makes some inexcusable flubs. The crux of my comment was that AI can be very helpful, if not damningly good, at examining, eg, a list of citations of medical research that doctors, including Mark Hyman, use in their email newsletters to indicate the supplement he's pitching has scientific research behind it. AI can, and has, helped me read those studies in detail, understand what they've actually said vs what Hyman of the supplement maker said they say, and also reveal that—surprise!—the studies were mostly paid for and conducted by the company selling the supplement being studied.
But to your very good point, AI can make mistakes. Check it's work ruthlessly.
among some significant downsides. AI is kind of like a toddler who speaks 190 languages, builds rockets and has read every volume of Encyclopedia Britannica…but still poops in its own diaper.
He’s on the list of pseudoscientists. We all need to do our due diligence and not just believe everything we’re fed. I realise if we hear the same thing over and over and over again we begin to believe it. This is a time not to.
You're, of course, right about the need to do individual due diligence...and about the human proclivity to absorb a continuously repeated message as somehow-maybe-possibly acceptably accurate. That's the seam between actual fact and asserted claim where longevity chiselers live, hoping consumers accept the ready list of citations of research reports as evidence of proof. But if all the research papers about the supplement were paid for, conducted and written by the company that makes the supplement the doctor is pitching to you....
Wow I’m writing about Mitopure this week too (had never heard of it until a few weeks ago). A skincare company is now using it in cream form. Great article. I need to figure out if derms need to be held to this standard. So many of them shill products and don’t disclose
Cheryl, it sure seems that the so-called Mitopure "gold standard" of RCTs is defined as "a bunch of studies we paid our own employees & consultants to conduct on our own product." Derms are state-licensed MDs, of course. If they lean on Timeline's marketing schtick, they're not giving the straight story.
Thanks for exposing this long time grifter. My poor wife in her early days of dementia felt he was gonna be her savior for every medical ailment she had. And while I've gotten some good info from Andrew Huberman, his hawking of AG1 and LMNT among others have caused me to no longer listen.
Tom, I'm sorry to hear about your wife's negative experience with this provider. To your point, many clinical professionals give some accurate and helpful advice. But if they mix in other, unverified, self-dealing information that isn't accurate, they've shit the professional bed—if you'll excuse the language—and forfeited public trust. And that's simply and permanently unacceptable.
Thanks. I guess the other one that even tops Hyman is Mercola.
There is a Dennis Crouse who has researched alzheimers and aluminium and has good results with silica water. Info on YouTube. I have no affiliation with any of this but just giving you the info should you wish to follow it up.
The MD suffix is powerful. It works on me — suggests that the speaker might have valid information (I know I’m stating the obvious). So it’s infuriating that Dr. Hyman is abusing his status in this way. I appreciate your research here Paul Z. I feel newly inspired and fortified to detect and resist snake oil peddlers!
Judy, it's very powerful and persuasive, and using it shamelessly and cynically is heartbreaking in a way because, really, how many professions are still regarded by the public as deserving of trust? Doctors remain in that realm, for now. But relentlessly promoting unproven supplements in which you likely have a financial interest is devastating to that remaining public trust.
Superb reporting. Tunes, Paul.
I’m glad it passes serious MD muster, sir. But…what does Tunes mean?
As in “Looney”?
I have no idea how that auto corrected or what I even meant to say, lol!
I know that pain….
I'm so glad you wrote this because, like others here, I'm so tired of these grifters getting away with shilling their snake oil. I've bought into it in the past and lost plenty of money for it, too. Luckily I've wisened up but - as the saying goes: There's a sucker born every minute.
Heather, it's human nature to want to believe doctors who sound earnest, personal and scientifically backed. That's what makes this particular doctor effective and his business practices troubling to so many consumers. The good thing nowadays is you can ask any competent free AI to evaluate this doctor's or any doctor's claims about anything he or they are selling, and you'll get a fairly thorough read on what's actually what.
With caution. AI gets things wrong and commercial LLMs still have a predisposition to reinforce what you want them to say. Medical LLMs are strongly biased towards standard guidelines and status quo, some new research - especially research that overturns standard care - gets taken up very slowly.
An excellent and well-taken call out, Dr. Stein. i should have been more careful in how I wrote my comment. To your point, commercial AI models do tend to cheer on its user's POV sometimes (not always, but enough to not be taken at its word all the time), and even my $100/mo version of Claude makes some inexcusable flubs. The crux of my comment was that AI can be very helpful, if not damningly good, at examining, eg, a list of citations of medical research that doctors, including Mark Hyman, use in their email newsletters to indicate the supplement he's pitching has scientific research behind it. AI can, and has, helped me read those studies in detail, understand what they've actually said vs what Hyman of the supplement maker said they say, and also reveal that—surprise!—the studies were mostly paid for and conducted by the company selling the supplement being studied.
But to your very good point, AI can make mistakes. Check it's work ruthlessly.
That's a pretty fantastic upside of AI.
among some significant downsides. AI is kind of like a toddler who speaks 190 languages, builds rockets and has read every volume of Encyclopedia Britannica…but still poops in its own diaper.
That's a fantastic way to say it. Exactly!