Nina Teicholz, PhD
@bigfatsurprise • 208,576 subscribers
Science journalist challenging nutrition dogma and flawed dietary guidelines. PhD in nutrition. NYT bestselling author. Subscribe for uncensored insights 👇
Shorts
Videos
The government HAS NO CAPS ON CHOLESTEROL..for ten years now. So why didn’t they tell you? 🤔 The U.S. government quietly dropped its cholesterol cap in 2015 (the American Heart Association did the same in 2013), yet most people still think dietary cholesterol is something to fear. Why? Maybe because our government is too afraid to publicly correct its mistake. There was no information campaign, no big announcement—mostly just silence. Here’s the truth: cholesterol isn’t the enemy. The government even funded many large-scale, randomized clinical trials to test the link between #cholesterol and heart disease. What did they find? 👇 No proof that eating meat, butter, and cheese leads to heart disease. Some studies even showed the opposite: the more people lowered their cholesterol, the more likely they were to die from heart disease. So what happened to those studies? Buried. Suppressed. Ignored. One sat in the basement of the NIH for years, never published. Another delayed publication for 16 years. And while the government dropped its cholesterol caps, it still says that healthy diets are "lower in cholesterol" It's time to ask: why are we still being misled?
Nina Teicholz, PhD1,216,564 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr
“We are going to ensure the new guidelines are based on science, not medical dogma.” For decades, saturated fat was vilified based on flawed science and institutional groupthink. Now, the FDA Commissioner Dr. Marty Makary is citing the very research I spent years unearthing. For the first time, we may see a true reversal: the new Dietary Guidelines could drop the cap on saturated fat. I never thought I’d hear this from a federal official. But here we are. Watch the clip. This is an historic moment. HHS Robert F. Kennedy Jr Secretary Brooke Rollins MAHA PAC🗽 MAHA Institute
Nina Teicholz, PhD122,023 Aufrufe • vor 11 Monaten
What if “high cholesterol” in women isn’t a red flag… but a sign of better health? Early studies showed women over 50 with higher cholesterol (up to 280 mg/dL) actually lived longer. But that data was ignored. Why? Because it didn’t fit the simplified “cholesterol = bad” narrative built around middle-aged men. Our health policies are still shaped by these omissions. Women are often left behind when science is simplified.
Nina Teicholz, PhD85,671 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr
🍳 Why do we fear the most nutritious part of the egg? For 60+ years, we’ve been told to fear cholesterol. The result? Millions of people avoiding egg yolks—the most nutrient-dense part of the egg. Why? Because of flawed science and policies on cholesterol. #Cholesterol is essential to every cell in your body. It’s a building block for your hormones. And the nutrients in egg yolks? Essential for brain health. You can’t easily get them from plants. How did we get here? Who benefited from this shift? And why are we still stuck in outdated nutrition dogma?
Nina Teicholz, PhD63,334 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr
If low-carb changed your health, don’t stay silent. The Dietary Guidelines are coming out soon. Lobbyists are speaking up. Corporations are speaking up. The public needs to have its voice heard as well. Let’s make sure the 2025-2030 Dietary Guidelines include an option for people with metabolic diseases. Graphics for sharing are here: Please share and tag decision-makers. Your voice matters!! Use it. Ken D Berry MD
Nina Teicholz, PhD28,535 Aufrufe • vor 7 Monaten
What was the first food ever labeled addictive in the scientific literature? Not cheese. Not tea biscuits. It was chocolate, way back in the 1800s. Long before the invention of “ultra-processed foods.” Early journals on drug addiction described chocolate as drug-like. And when Overeaters Anonymous was founded in the 1970s, chocolate was still considered the most addictive food on the planet. This history tells how certain foods hijack the brain, especially when loaded with sugar.
Nina Teicholz, PhD40,857 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr
The sugar industry paid Harvard scientists to blame fat instead of sugar. But what if the truth is worse? Yes, Harvard scientists took sugar industry money. But they already believed fat caused heart disease long before the checks arrived. They weren’t corrupt. They were convinced. I spent 9 years investigating this. 📚 10,000+ papers reviewed 🔬 Decades of research policy traced And what I found? Industry funding is just one part of a much deeper problem. The real issue: 🔹 Outdated ideas 🔹 Unquestioned assumptions 🔹 Science treated as settled—when it wasn’t This dogma made its way into our #dietaryguidelines. And we’re still living with the damage.
Nina Teicholz, PhD36,648 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr
Big changes are coming, and they’ll touch every plate in America. This fall, the U.S. will release new Dietary Guidelines, potentially the most transformative health policy of this administration. These guidelines shape everything from school lunches to hospital food to what your doctor recommends. Even if you think you ignore them, they’re still reaching you. And this time, the science might finally be better. 🤞 🎥 Brian Kilmeade
Nina Teicholz, PhD26,717 Aufrufe • vor 10 Monaten
What if your doctor wanted to recommend a low-carb diet but is wary, because that's not official policy? 😳 That’s the hidden power of the U.S. Dietary Guidelines. They determine: ➡️ What’s served in hospitals and schools ➡️ What the military eats ➡️ What food assistance programs provide ➡️ And yes, even what your doctor recommends The face that the Dietary Guidelines doesn't include a low-carb option is not because it isn't evidence-based. It's because the guidelines process has been hijacked by ultra-processed food interests and status-quo thinking. The new Dietary Guidelines for Americans will be released soon (They’re updated once every five years). That means we’re in a rare, powerful moment to push for change. 📣 It’s time to demand a low-carb option in the guidelines for the 88% of American adults who are not metabolically healthy.
Nina Teicholz, PhD20,907 Aufrufe • vor 8 Monaten
Remember that food pyramid with the giant base of grains and starches? 🌾 Eat more carbs, avoid fat. We were told to eat this way to get healthy. Instead, we got sicker. Millions followed the Dietary Guidelines and still struggle with weight and chronic disease. Blaming individuals ignores the truth: we were given bad advice. The problem is the guidelines themselves. 🎬 Brian Kilmeade
Nina Teicholz, PhD22,686 Aufrufe • vor 10 Monaten
Food companies are gaming the system by exploiting vague definitions of “ultra-processed” (UPF). Triscuits have been reformulated to have only 3 ingredients—so not UPF...but still a box of starch. Homemade cookies? Not UPF but still full of sugar and white flour. We need clearer standards. 🎥 Brian Kilmeade
Nina Teicholz, PhD21,643 Aufrufe • vor 10 Monaten
Whole milk was banned from schools in 2010. But lunch ladies—and lawmakers—are fighting back. 🥛 I swapped stories with Ken D Berry MD. One about parents trying to give away whole milk for free to kids. Another, about schools threatened with losing federal funding for daring to serve meals cooked from scratch. Why the crackdown on whole milk? Because of saturated fat. Even though there’s no evidence that whole milk causes heart disease in children or adults. Now, Congress is reconsidering the ban on whole milk. The Whole Milk for Healthy Kids Act has passed the House and seems to have bipartisan support in the Senate. What's your vote?
Nina Teicholz, PhD26,359 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr
There’s no evidence that lowering sodium in kids’ meals prevents heart disease. What we do know... 🧂 Low sodium is linked to cardiovascular harm in adults 🧂 Tasteless food is less likely to be eaten 🧂 Sugar is added to compensate We’re feeding kids low-sodium meals and then sweetening them with added sugar to make them palatable. This is how nutrition policy backfires.
Nina Teicholz, PhD18,293 Aufrufe • vor 9 Monaten
What if the obesity epidemic started with the best of intentions? In 1980, the U.S. released its first Dietary Guidelines. They were modeled after the American Heart Association’s low-fat advice. ➡️ Eat lean meat. ➡️ Eat low-fat dairy. ➡️ Eat more grains, fruits, and vegetables. At the time, it seemed like the right thing to do. But scientists warned there wasn’t enough evidence to justify it. There were no clinical trials to show this diet would improve health. And almost immediately after the guidelines were introduced, obesity rates began to climb. In 1980, just 13 to 15 percent of Americans were obese. Today, that number is approaching 50%. Why should we still live with the consequences of that decision?
Nina Teicholz, PhD22,537 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr
We like to think of science as objective, open to challenge, and committed to the truth. But what happens when scientists fall in love with their own ideas? I spoke to Joe Rogan about how that played out in #nutrition science. Researchers like Ancel Keys and Mark Hegsted became so committed to the diet-heart hypothesis that they stopped questioning it. They cherry-picked data, dismissed contradictory findings, and suppressed opposing views. I spent nine years investigating this story, and the deeper I looked, the clearer it became: science didn’t fail because the evidence was lacking. It failed because belief got in the way. When a scientific field stops self-correcting, the public pays the price.
Nina Teicholz, PhD23,539 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr
What if the Dietary Guidelines… never worked? ⠀ Two major government-funded experiments tested them—one on 50,000 women over 8 years. The result? No significant benefit for cancer, heart disease, weight loss, or diabetes. ⠀ In another study, participants following the Guidelines did no better than those eating what could only be called a junk food diet. ⠀ Yet these inconvenient findings were buried. No headlines. No course correction. ⠀ When the science says one thing, and policy does another, who’s being protected? 🎥 Nicole Shanahan
Nina Teicholz, PhD17,956 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr
Sugar is today’s tobacco—but without the warning label. Joe Rogan describes something we all know on some level: people will keep consuming harmful products, as long as it gives them short-term satisfaction. But here’s the part I find most troubling... Our government knows that excess sugar and refined carbohydrates increase the risk of diabetes, heart disease, and obesity. And still, the dietary guidelines continue to allow—and in some cases promote—their consumption. We’ve seen this story before with cigarettes. The difference is, back then, we eventually got warning labels. With #sugar, we’re still pretending there’s no problem. This is not just a consumer issue. It’s a policy failure. We need to start asking better questions about the science behind our food system—and the interests that keep real change from happening.
Nina Teicholz, PhD18,227 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr
Here’s something most people don’t know: the U.S. Dietary Guidelines are designed only for “healthy” Americans. That’s only 12% of US adults, according to a recent estimate. Everyone else—including those with obesity, diabetes, or insulin resistance—is left out of the nutrition policy that shapes our food system. Even more concerning, the guidelines don’t meet basic nutrient targets for potassium, magnesium, choline, and other essential nutrients. These are the very building blocks of health. People deserve nutrition policy that reflects reality and supports long-term health. That’s what I’ve spent the last decade working toward, and it should be our common goal.
Nina Teicholz, PhD13,591 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr
Keine weiteren Inhalte verfügbar