When it comes to getting your daily fruit servings, the form matters just as much as the quantity. While fruit juice might seem like a convenient way to consume fruit, eating whole fruit offers significant advantages for your health, weight management, and overall well-being.

The Fiber Factor

The most critical difference between whole fruit and juice lies in fiber content. When fruit is juiced, the beneficial fiber is stripped away, leaving behind concentrated sugar water with vitamins. A medium apple contains about 4 grams of fiber, while apple juice contains virtually none. This fiber serves multiple purposes: it slows sugar absorption, preventing rapid blood glucose spikes; feeds beneficial gut bacteria; promotes satiety, helping you feel full; and supports healthy digestion and regular bowel movements.

Blood Sugar and Metabolic Health

Whole fruit causes a gradual rise in blood sugar thanks to its fiber content and the physical structure of the fruit, which takes time to break down. In contrast, fruit juice delivers a concentrated dose of sugar that rapidly enters your bloodstream, similar to drinking soda. This spike can lead to energy crashes, increased hunger, and over time, may contribute to insulin resistance. For example, a cup of orange juice contains the sugar of 3-4 oranges but can be consumed in seconds, whereas eating multiple whole oranges would take considerably longer and likely leave you satisfied after just one or two.

Satiety and Weight Management

Whole fruits require chewing, which triggers satiety signals in your brain and naturally slows consumption. The fiber and water content create a feeling of fullness in your stomach. Meanwhile, liquid calories from juice don’t register the same way in our hunger-regulation systems. Studies consistently show that people don’t compensate for liquid calories by eating less food later, making juice consumption a contributor to excess calorie intake.

Nutrient Preservation

The juicing process can destroy some heat-sensitive vitamins and expose nutrients to oxidation. Whole fruits also contain beneficial compounds in their skin and pulp that are lost during juicing. The antioxidants, flavonoids, and phytonutrients in whole fruit work synergistically with the fiber for maximum health benefits.

The Bottom Line

While occasional fruit juice isn’t harmful for most people, making whole fruit your default choice supports better blood sugar control, weight management, and digestive health. Save juice for special occasions and reach for whole fruit; your body will appreciate the complete nutritional package that only whole fruit can provide.

Photo by Sardar Faizan on Unsplash

Managing cholesterol levels is crucial for heart health, and dietary changes can make a significant impact. The Mayo Clinic outlines several foods and strategies that can help improve cholesterol numbers when combined with exercise and other heart-healthy habits.

Fiber-Rich Foods

Oatmeal and oat bran are excellent sources of soluble fiber, which reduces LDL (bad) cholesterol by decreasing cholesterol absorption into the bloodstream. Consuming 5 to 10 grams or more of soluble fiber daily can effectively lower LDL levels. A single serving of oatmeal-based breakfast cereal provides 3 to 4 grams of fiber, with additional fiber coming from added fruits like bananas or berries. Other soluble fiber sources include kidney beans, Brussels sprouts, apples, and pears.

Omega-3 Fatty Acids

Fatty fish containing omega-3 fatty acids can reduce triglycerides and may lower blood pressure while reducing blood clot risk. For heart attack survivors, these acids may decrease sudden death risk. While omega-3s don’t directly affect LDL cholesterol, they can lower triglycerides and increase HDL (good) cholesterol. The American Heart Association recommends eating at least two weekly servings of baked or grilled fish. Top sources include mackerel, herring, tuna, salmon, and trout. Walnuts, flaxseed, and canola oil contain smaller amounts.

Heart-Healthy Fats

Nuts like almonds and walnuts can improve blood cholesterol and may protect against heart attacks in people with existing heart disease. Avocados provide monounsaturated fatty acids (MUFAs) and fiber that can improve HDL cholesterol and LDL quality. Adding two weekly avocado servings to a heart-healthy diet may lower heart disease risk. Olive oil is another excellent MUFA source that can replace other fats in cooking, marinades, and dressings, and may reduce heart attack risk.

Additional Cholesterol-Lowering Options

Plant sterols and stanols, found in fortified margarines and orange juice, help block cholesterol absorption. Consuming 2 grams daily can lower LDL cholesterol by 5% to 15%. Whey protein, found in dairy products and supplement powders, has been shown to lower both LDL and total cholesterol, as well as blood pressure.

Lifestyle Modifications

Maximizing these foods’ benefits requires limiting saturated and trans fats. Reducing saturated fat consumption to less than 7% of daily calories can decrease LDL cholesterol by 8% to 10%. The FDA has banned partially hydrogenated vegetable oils in processed foods due to their negative cholesterol impact.

Photo by Eiliv Aceron on Unsplash

Last week, I sat in a session with Dr. David Sinclair, a professor of genetics at Harvard and a well-known apologist for various anti-aging strategies.

The session was mildly interesting, but not earth-shattering. As I listened, my mind wandered, reflecting on the last 25 years I have spent in the supplement industry.

To a large degree, I would say the supplement industry is like most things: the more things change, the more they stay the same. The current anti-aging craze is an example. When I first entered the industry, we had anti-aging, but we mainly talked about antioxidants.

Apparently, someone decided that “anti-aging” is a better marketing term, but the general idea is the same: Protecting cells from various stressors such as free radicals so that they won’t “grow old.”

Dr. Sinclair is one of the more prominent names in the anti-aging world, primarily because he makes some pretty aggressive claims. He is one of a few scientists who claim that not only can we stop aging, but we can also reverse it.

I am not going to take any position on his claims; I really don’t feel qualified. However, there are a few things I will note that you might find interesting:

• Sinclair’s views are debatable, and many scientists view them with outright skepticism.
• To his credit, Sinclair does not push any particular supplement brands. He pushes classes of supplements (which I will cover in a moment).
• Outside supplements, Sinclair’s views on staying young and healthy are mainstream and align with my own views, which I often share here. (Eat healthy, move, etc.)

Now, just for fun, I am going to give you his supplement recommendations. For some reason, he pretends to try to be secretive about these, and I have no idea why. Regardless, I am going to give them to you exactly as he shared them with us.

• NAD boosters (such as NMN): 1000 mg/day
• Berberine (or metformin): 1000 mg/day
• Resveratrol and fisetin: 1000 mg/day and 500 mg/day
• Spermidine: 6 mg/day
• Vitamins D3 (5K U) + K2
• Vitamins B6, B9, and B12
• Alpha lipoic acid: 500 mg/day
• Omega 3-6-9 fatty acids
• Nattokinase: 12K FUs/day

Again, his general goal for these supplements is to keep cells healthy. There is nothing very unusual here, though some of his recommendations (such as resveratrol) are a bit controversial.

Sinclair believes that we are on the cusp of enormously lengthening the lifespan of humans (to around 150 years). He shared many studies being conducted at Harvard that show great promise.

If you want to learn more about his beliefs and studies, here is his Wikipedia article.

I am not sure what to say about a lot of what I heard. While Sinclair is not selling supplements, he wants to be relevant, and the best way to be relevant is to make claims that are a bit outlandish and over the top. Generally, that is the framework through which I view him. I wouldn’t say he is dangerous though; his tips and regimen might strike you as surprisingly mainstream.

In fact, the country is full of people doing very similar health regimens already (but sadly, not living to 150 years old).

Controversial anti-aging strategies

For sure, the anti-aging industry is becoming increasingly crowded, with some approaches being sold that I would say are gimmicky. Here are examples:

• Young blood/plasma transfusions. Inspired by parabiosis studies in mice, some clinics offer young donor plasma infusions.
• Metformin for longevity. This diabetes drug shows promise in some studies for healthy aging, leading to off-label use by biohackers.
• Rapamycin/mTOR inhibitors. Initially an immunosuppressant, rapamycin extends lifespan in lab animals.
• Hyperbaric oxygen therapy. Marketed for cellular repair and telomere lengthening, but evidence for anti-aging benefits is mixed.
• Red light/infrared therapy. Claims about mitochondrial enhancement and skin benefits are popular on social media.
• Peptide therapies. Various synthetic peptides are marketed for growth hormone release, cellular repair, and longevity.
• Cryotherapy and cold exposure. Potentially beneficial for recovery and stress response.

All I can say is to be careful and hold onto your wallets. You will find great marketing behind these approaches, but not one of them has much in the way of scientific support.

None of us enjoys getting older, but unfortunately, avoiding aging seems to be a pretty tough nut to crack.

Photo by Malin K. on Unsplash

I frequently discuss weight management here. It is not because I am vain; it is because weight management is important.

I get that there is a growing crowd that wants to pretend that obesity is not a problem and, in fact, is normal. Unfortunately, they are wrong. The science matters, and the science is very clear: there are very few (if any) more important things you can do for your overall health than actively manage your weight. The list of risks associated with being overweight is extensive.

That being said, it is absolutely true that the number you see on a scale does not tell the tale. You have to take that number with a grain of salt. I want to go into the reasons for that, and then tell you the metric you really need to focus on.

The “noise” problem

There are a lot of misconceptions about weight gain and loss, and one of the biggest revolves around the “noise” that surrounds your body weight.

Here are examples of noise. Some of these may be obvious to you, but are not obvious to everyone.

• If you drink a liter of water and step on a scale immediately afterward, you will “weigh” 2.2 lbs more than you did before you drank the water.
• If you urinate an hour later, you will suddenly “lose” a pound or two.
• If you eat dinner at 8:00 pm, you will probably weigh more the next day than if you had eaten at 5:00 pm.
• If you eat a salty meal, you will probably weigh more the next day than if you had eaten the exact same meal with less salt. (This is due to the salt increasing your water retention.)
• If you exercise hard for an hour and sweat a lot, you may “lose” up to 3 lbs (if you are not drinking water during the workout).

As you may have noted, this noise generally involves the amount of water in your body, which comes and goes. Don’t get too excited or worried about what the scale says at one particular time. You cannot gain or lose much real weight in a day, but your scale may show a variance of 3-4 pounds a day simply due to water.

Avoid trying to fool yourself by working this noise to your advantage. For example, it is a fool’s errand to exercise for two hours without drinking anything, so that you can comfort yourself with a low weight number immediately afterward. That is not real weight loss.

The “measuring the wrong thing” problem

There is an element of truth to be found in the “obesity is normal” crowd, and that is this: The number on a scale does not mean too much anyway. BMI calculations don’t mean much either.

I am not out of shape, but my BMI is right at 25 (the border between normal and overweight). Why? Because I have a bit more muscle mass than the average person.

If I chose to buy into just trying to hit a number on the scale so that my BMI looks better, I would be making a big mistake. Here’s why: Your weight is actually a component of four primary things.

• Muscle
• Fat
• Bone
• Water

Weight loss management does not affect bone mass, of course, and while it does affect water mass, we have already noted that water mass is just noise.

Weight loss management affects both muscle and fat, but here is something very important: You do not want your muscle mass to shrink. Regardless of what the scale says, this is not something to celebrate. I do not want a BMI of 24 if it means I have to give up 5 pounds of muscle.

Muscle mass is extremely important as you age, and ironically, it is your muscle mass that actually helps you burn more calories. Losing weight at the expense of losing muscle is not a winning strategy. This is a big part of why protein is so popular in weight loss right now.

The only number that you want going down

So, water mass is noise, bone mass is unaffected by weight management, and muscle mass should be protected.

That means the only actual body mass you want to reduce is fat.

Ideally, your fat mass should be the only thing shrinking when you are trying to lose weight.

This is the problem with using a scale to measure your weight. A scale weight is not a measurement of your fat mass. Scales essentially measure the wrong thing.

A solution to this problem

Sadly, measuring fat mass in the human body is not easy, and if you want accuracy, can be expensive.

There are several options on the market.

• Some scales attempt to measure fat by sending signals through the body. They are not horribly expensive, but likely not very accurate.
• Body fat caliper measurement systems are unsophisticated but inexpensive. They work if you follow directions carefully.
• Some doctors and clinics have more sophisticated and accurate machines. My Orange Theory gym, for example, has a machine for this purpose. Unfortunately, there is often a charge for using them (in my case, the machine is part of the membership fee).

If you are serious about weight management, I encourage you to choose one of these methods and start measuring your fat content on a monthly or quarterly basis. You can use the scale as well to stay on track in a general way, but it’s crucial to find a way to monitor your fat intake.

Remember your goal: Lower your fat but protect your muscle. Muscle matters.

A mantra I often repeat here: If a diet is unbalanced, it is probably bad for you.

This is common sense, and it is especially true when the imbalance in diets comes from eliminating fruits and vegetables.

But, alas, even healthy people fall for these kinds of fad diets, which is why I am going to discuss the carnivore diet today.

What is the carnivore diet?

The carnivore diet involves consuming exclusively animal products while eliminating all plant foods. This typically means eating meat, fish, eggs, and sometimes dairy products, while completely avoiding vegetables, fruits, grains, legumes, and other plant-based foods.

Potential benefits

Proponents of the carnivore diet report several potential advantages:

Weight loss is possible due to the diet’s naturally low carbohydrate content and high protein intake.

The elimination of processed foods and simple carbohydrates may lead to more stable blood sugar levels, potentially benefiting individuals with insulin resistance or type 2 diabetes.

Many followers report reduced inflammation and improvement in autoimmune conditions.

The diet’s simplicity appeals to those who struggle with food choices or have multiple food sensitivities, as it eliminates most potential trigger foods.

Some people experience improved mental clarity and energy levels, possibly due to stable blood glucose and ketosis from minimal carbohydrate intake.

The high protein content supports muscle maintenance and growth, while the elimination of anti-nutrients found in some plants (like phytates and lectins) may improve nutrient absorption for certain individuals.

Animal products provide highly bioavailable forms of nutrients like vitamin B12, iron, and complete amino acid profiles.

Significant concerns

The complete elimination of plant foods means missing out on essential nutrients like vitamin C, fiber, folate, and thousands of beneficial plant compounds called phytonutrients. This nutritional restriction could lead to deficiencies over time, despite animal products being nutrient-dense.

The lack of dietary fiber is particularly problematic, as fiber supports digestive health, feeds beneficial gut bacteria, and helps regulate cholesterol levels.

Long-term adherence may negatively impact the gut microbiome diversity, which is crucial for immune function and overall health.

The diet’s high saturated fat content and absence of heart-protective plant compounds could potentially increase the risk of heart disease.

The restrictive nature makes the diet difficult to sustain both socially and practically. This is not an insignificant thing.

The elimination of potentially beneficial plant foods like berries, leafy greens, and nuts means missing out on compounds with proven anti-inflammatory and antioxidant properties.

The verdict

While some individuals may experience short-term benefits from the carnivore diet, particularly those with specific autoimmune conditions or severe food sensitivities, the short-term benefits generally have no real science backing them, and the long-term effects are probably flat-out bleak.

Most nutrition experts recommend a more balanced approach that includes a variety of both animal and plant foods.

So do I.

The A2 milk industry has exploded in recent years, with companies like The a2 Milk Company commanding premium prices by promising easier digestion and reduced gastrointestinal discomfort. But beneath the slick marketing lies a fundamental question: is A2 milk a legitimate health innovation or an elaborate marketing scheme designed to extract more money from consumers’ wallets?

The science behind the claims

A2 milk contains only the A2 variant of beta-casein protein, while conventional milk contains both A1 and A2 proteins. Proponents argue that A1 protein breaks down during digestion to produce a peptide called BCM-7, which allegedly causes inflammation and digestive issues. This theory sounds compelling, but the scientific evidence remains frustratingly thin.
Several small studies have suggested that some individuals experience less bloating and stomach discomfort when drinking A2 milk compared to regular milk. However, these studies are limited in scope and often funded by A2 milk companies themselves, raising questions about bias. The European Food Safety Authority has stated that current evidence doesn’t support claims that A1 protein causes negative health effects in the general population.

The marketing machine

What’s undeniable is A2 milk’s marketing prowess. The industry has successfully positioned itself as a solution for people who experience discomfort after drinking milk, often targeting those who assume they’re lactose intolerant. This is particularly clever because many people who struggle with regular milk may actually be reacting to other components entirely, not specifically the A1 protein.
The premium pricing strategy is telling. A2 milk typically costs 50-100% more than conventional milk, despite coming from cows that require no special feed or care beyond genetic testing. This price premium suggests the value proposition lies more in perception than production costs.

The lactose confusion

Perhaps the most problematic aspect of A2 milk marketing is how it can mislead consumers about lactose intolerance. A2 milk contains the same amount of lactose as regular milk, yet marketing often implies it’s suitable for people with milk sensitivities. This confusion can lead genuinely lactose-intolerant individuals to waste money on an expensive product that won’t solve their underlying problem.

The verdict

Calling A2 milk an outright “scam” would be unfair. Some consumers do report feeling better when switching to A2 milk, and there’s legitimate scientific rationale behind the protein difference. However, the evidence supporting dramatic health benefits remains weak, and the marketing often oversells limited research.

The reality likely lies somewhere in the middle. A2 milk may provide modest benefits for a subset of consumers with specific sensitivities, but it’s not the revolutionary health breakthrough that marketing suggests. For most people, the premium price isn’t justified by demonstrable health advantages.

Consumers would be better served by first determining whether their milk-related discomfort stems from lactose intolerance, milk protein allergies, or other factors before assuming A2 milk is the solution. While not technically a scam, A2 milk represents a classic case of marketing outpacing science—a premium product built more on promise than proven performance.

Photo by Anita Jankovic on Unsplash