[ad_1]
Nutrition specialists worldwide collectively exhale every time Netflix releases a documentary on nutrition, and with a valid reason: historically, these films are brimming with prejudice, unreliable data, and sensationalism… all of which do not actually facilitate anyone in taking control of their health.
As I consistently mention, false information does not empower anybody. Actually, it does the complete opposite.
Upon learning that You Are What You Eat was helmed by the same director who was behind The Game Changers, I knew I had to watch it and compose a review.
Read my review of The Game Changers here.
In this analysis of You Are What You Eat, I delve into Netflix’s latest documentary on nutrition.
The film centers on the implementation of the Stanford Twins Study. This study, spanning 8 weeks, which was recently published at the end of 2023, involved 22 pairs of twins to assess the cardiometabolic impacts of a vegan diet versus an omnivorous diet.
Since twins share identical genetics, this provided researchers with a rare opportunity to gain valuable insights into how each diet might affect one twin as opposed to the other. According to Christopher Gardner, a nutrition scientist and one of the study’s researchers, individuals react differently to the same food, so having individuals who are genetically identical eliminates this confounding factor.
Twins exhibit the same genetic composition, rendering them ideal controls for one another.
Throughout the 8-week period, researchers will monitor markers of cardiovascular health, metabolic status, and gut microbiome through stool and blood samples.
They inform viewers that they are scrutinizing people’s biological clock, body composition, microbiome, and brain. The actual study, which I discuss in the latter part of this critique, does not mention the microbiome, brain, or biological clock. I wonder if these aspects are forthcoming.
Netflix’s You Are What You Eat Review
In the first episode of You Are What You Eat, we are introduced to some of the experts involved in the study, along with 4 sets of the study’s twins.
During the initial 4 weeks, each twin is randomly assigned to follow either a vegan or omnivorous diet. Each meal they consume is prepared for them and delivered, leaving no room for estimation, and researchers can regulate all aspects of each diet. Both diets were classified as ‘healthy’ by scientists.
Following the initial 4 weeks, the twins continue with their allocated diet but are responsible for preparing their own meals.
Additionally, the twins each have a physical trainer with whom they exercise routinely.
It was evident where this documentary was heading when Dr. Michael Greger, a physician and a well-known advocate of a vegan diet, makes an appearance on the screen. He also featured in The Game Changers and What The Health, both Netflix documentaries whose overarching narrative promoted a plant-based diet and essentially evoked fear in people about consuming animal products.
I have previously referenced Dr. Greger in my writing, essentially holding him accountable for distorting facts and exaggerating assertions to suit his own agenda.
He swiftly adopts the same approach in You Are What You Eat, informing viewers how excessive consumption of dairy elevates the risk of developing Parkinson’s disease and prostate cancer (without citations or evidence, naturally). He asserts that ‘the leading cause of death in the US is the American Diet’ (while according to the CDC it is actually heart disease, although there are various factors contributing to this), emphasizing that what we consume holds greater significance than anything else.
This is characteristic of Greger, making exaggerated claims without any subtleties.
Dr. Michael Greger
We are also introduced to a ‘plant-based dairy innovator’ named Miyoko Schinner, who alleges that cheese is ‘biologically addictive,’ which is baseless and unsubstantiated. She proceeds to reiterate the standard vegan argument that ‘milk is intended for baby cows, not humans.’
She contends that ‘most populations around the world did not consume meat and dairy, except in very minimal quantities, if at all.’
Once again, we have an ‘expert’ who clearly holds a bias towards a vegan diet. I have nothing against the vegan diet, of course, but in a documentary, it is always advisable to present both sides of the argument.
I eagerly awaited the presentation of an ‘expert’ without a plant-based agenda, but SPOILER ALERT: I was let down.
As the documentary unfolds, we are educated about food deserts and urban farms.
Here’s why we don’t all have the same 24 hours in a day.
Tracye McQuirter, a Public Health Nutritionist and self-proclaimed ‘vegan activist,’ details the creation of a balanced vegan plate while discussing food apartheid for African Americans in urban areas.
This is an extremely valuable lesson, and it is accurate – food deserts indeed exist, particularly in marginalized communities. They are intricately linked to poor health outcomes, and it is imperative that we take steps to enhance access to nutritious foods in North America.
Another crucial lesson we learn pertains to the conflicts of interest within the dietary guidelines committee and how agricultural lobbyists influence the language used in the guidelines. This is also a prevalent issue, and the reason why Health Canada declined to involve the food industry in the development of the latest dietary guidelines.
Regrettably, the remainder of You Are What You Eat appears to function as a promotion for a vegan diet.
We are enlightened about the animal agriculture industry. We are taken inside factory farms. We learn about their unsanitary conditions, the administration of antibiotics to the animals, and the spreading of hog feces and urine in neighboring fields. We are shown a distressed chicken and contaminated ponds.
Dr. Greger steps in to inform us that more antibiotics are administered to farm animals than are used in all of human medicine to foster growth and prevent diseases in a stressful, unhygienic environment. ‘Life-saving, essential medications are being squandered solely to produce cheaper meat.’
Or, perhaps there are simply more animals than humans, accounting for these statistics?
Furthermore, according to the WHO, antimicrobials are not only used in animal farming, but also in plant cultivation. Conveniently, this is not mentioned.
However, it is legal to use antibiotics in cattle for growth promotion and disease prevention (here and here)
Should the average individual be concerned?
I am uncertain, as we were only presented with one viewpoint. The ordinary person will likely accept this unchallenged perspective as fact, which is problematic. I would have appreciated hearing from an impartial farmer and scientist regarding this matter, and well, the entire documentary.
We hear from a poultry farmer who evidently detests his occupation, discussing the unpleasant odor and filth in the chicken coop. He details how the birds are bred to have disproportionately large breasts, which their organs and skeletal structure cannot keep up with. The birds scratch each other, resulting in wounds that become infested with bacteria.
We hear from an environmental activist lawyer regarding antibiotics in meat, and from Pat Brown, the Founder of Impossible Foods, who asserts that ‘every time you consume a steak, a small puff of smoke rises in the Amazon. That smoke represents the ‘second-hand smoke from your burger.’
George Monbiot, an author, journalist, and environmental activist, asserts that the meat industry is essentially harming the planet. ‘the agricultural industry is one of the primary sources of greenhouse gases on earth.’
We are presented with a graphic indicating that greenhouse gases from the agricultural industry31% is the percentage for the agricultural sector, compared to 14% for the transportation sector.
These figures seemed unusual to me, so I decided to search for the statistics.
Apparently, the EPA provides different data:
Transitioning from the dreadful perils of meat to the unpleasant aspects of farmed fish, we encounter more advocates, one of them being Don Staniford, who advocates against salmon farms. He asserts that ‘if people understood the complete horrors of salmon farming, they would avoid it like the clichéd plague.’
Exaggeration appears to be one of the significant strengths of You Are What You Eat.
We observe Don informing the twins about how companies artificially color their fish red to disguise the fact that it’s farmed. He states that this synthetic color has been ‘associated with human health issues,’ although no specifics about these issues are provided.
He discusses how farmed salmon is significantly fattier than pizza and bacon. And, to dispel the notion that farmed salmon contains beneficial fats, he presents the dismissive assertion that ‘those aren’t good oils, they’re omega 6s.’
Please Don, desist from speaking. The twins pick up on his fearmongering, labeling the farmed salmon as ‘diseased food’ and disposing of it in the actual garbage.
Are seed oils detrimental? Explore my post here.
We have transitioned from discussing food deserts and access to nourishing food to discarding a perfectly good piece of fish. Repugnant.
Alexandra Morton, a biologist and activist, asserts that tons of waste are ‘spilling out of these farms’ and presents disturbing images of diseased fish. She contends that over 98% of the sampled fish she purchased from supermarkets and sushi restaurants were infected with a salmon blood virus, although she concedes that there is no research on how these pathogens affect humans.
I’m not going to assert that the issues the activists are addressing are untrue, but without any counterbalance, it all comes across as individuals advocating an agenda. As someone with critical thinking skills, this makes me highly suspicious of their veracity.
In a brief aside, Eric Adams, the mayor of New York, discusses how a diet reversed his diabetes with a Whole Food Plant Based diet. He discloses that his endocrinologist didn’t learn about diet and diabetes in medical school, so he took matters into his own hands.
I find the ‘doctors don’t appreciate the value of diet’ strategy to be a particularly disheartening, lazy approach to turning people against conventional medicine and recommendations.
What were the findings of the Stanford Twins study?
After all the exertion, did the Twins study results favor a vegan diet?
Indeed, in some aspects.
As depicted in the illustration below, the vegan twins experienced a more substantial reduction in LDL-C, the ‘bad’ cholesterol. However, their HDL or ‘good’ cholesterol also decreased more than that of the omnivores, and the vegans’ triglycerides ended up significantly higher than those of the omnivores.
