Exercise, independent of anything that happens with your body weight, you will be healthier. So, exercise is one of the only things that will actually improve your biomarkers of health without even losing weight ... It'll improve your insulin sensitivity, inflammation, all that stuff. So, everybody out there looking for a hack to be healthier–exercise is the hack.

There was actually a recent really large meta-analysis of over a million subjects, and basically what it showed was that for every 10g increase in fiber, there was a 10% reduction in the risk of mortality—and that extended, specifically, also to cardiovascular disease and cancer.

A lot of people will get pretty bad GI irritation with loading creatine in terms of GI bloating, nausea, those sorts of things ... You're talking about getting the results you want in 1 week as opposed to 3 weeks. It's really not a big difference.

We have about, like, over a half-century of research now on artificial sweeteners, and really, the only time we can tie them to any kind of disease is cross-sectional data and when we give rodents super high doses of artificial sweeteners.

If you want to improve gut health... the three biggest levers you can pull is not eating too many calories, exercising—there is a connection between exercise and the gut—and fiber.

Of the macronutrients, protein is definitely the biggest lever that you can pull ... It doesn't take a ton of protein to get a lot of the muscle-building benefits ... The benefits really start to plateau out around 1.6 grams per kilogram of body weight. There's some evidence that maybe even up to, like, 2.4 or 2.8 grams per kilo may give like a little bit more benefit.

These watches... People are like, 'Oh, well, it told me I burned this many calories.' They are not accurate for energy expenditure ... There was a meta-analysis in 2018 I want to say, between a 28 and 93% overestimation of energy expenditure by these watches.

There are some pretty compelling studies showing that exercise increases your sensitivity to satiety signals. So, basically, you have the same satiety signals, but you're more sensitive to them when you exercise.

People ask me about timing of creatine, those sorts of things. There's some really small, really tenuous—I really want to emphasize that—evidence that perhaps after a workout might be better than before workout. But I tell people, just take it whenever you'll take it regularly.

HDL is important because it's a marker of metabolic health. If you have high HDL, it suggests that you are metabolically quite healthy ... People who have high HDL will have good biomarkers of metabolic health.

When you look at LDL and you look at the lifetime exposure to LDL, it is like a linear effect on heart disease. And we know that it's actually not so much LDL, but it's more ApoB, but that tends to track with LDL just in general.

There is no situation where it is not a net positive to take somebody who drinks sugar-sweetened beverages and have them drink an artificially sweetened beverage.

What about artificial sweeteners for me? ... Do I think that they are healthful? Probably not. Do I think they're unhealthy. I would say, based on the current data, I don't think that they're unhealthy.

I think it's fine to consume saturated fat ... I think limiting it to 7-10% of your daily calorie intake is probably wise, again, based on the all the consensus of the evidence I've seen.

What they showed is that, yes, you can build muscle and lose fat, but you will never do either thing to the best of your ability if you're trying to do both at the same time.

If we were to talk about how much of a hazard ratio do these bring to you in terms of all-cause mortality ... Hypertension is about 20%. Type 2 diabetes is about a 30% increase in mortality. Smoking is a 50% increase. Being weak relative to being strong is about 250%. Having a very low VO2 max—in the bottom 25% of the population versus being in the top 2.5%— of the population is about 400%.

We know you don't have to train to failure to grow muscle. In fact, it may actually be a little bit counterproductive just in terms of the fatigue that it causes relative to the stimulus. We know that for most movements you get most of the hypertrophy and strength benefits going within a few reps of failure ... If you've never actually taken something to failure, like true failure, people are really bad at estimating it.

Try to detach how you feel from the process it takes to get there ... As you do the process, you start to see the results, and then the motivation becomes more sustained.

There's also been some people who have said, 'Well, creatine can cause hair loss, and you've got to be careful about that.' I don't think the data on that's very compelling at all. There was a single study that showed an increase in DHT from supplementing with creatine—one study, 2009, I've never seen it replicated, never seen any follow-up.

I think people kind of just equated supplements with steroids. 'Well, you're supposed to cycle steroids, so we should cycle supplements.' And creatine is not hormonal. It's not the same biofeedback loop. So, I would say there's probably no reason to cycle it.

The research seems to really clearly suggests that eating enough fiber, which is, again, a prebiotic—that that is a better way to get a healthier gut, per se, than probiotic.

What I would tell people is focus, probably, less on sugar; focus more on fiber. So, if you're eating 30, 40, 50, 60 grams of fiber a day, but your sugar's, you know, 80, 90 grams, I would not be that worried about it.

Touching on creatine, it is the most tested, safe, and effective sports supplement we have ... There are thousands of studies on creatine monohydrate now ... If you're using any other form of creatine, I think you're wasting your money.

If the house is on fire, just get out of the house. We can worry about why the fire started later, but just get out. And there's so much like paralysis by analysis out there that people don't end up actually starting.

One of the main benefits of testosterone is the increase in satellite cell number that you get, which is going to increase your potential for increasing muscle mass.

When you look at the research data and the meta-analyses on, say, time-restricted eating versus non, when calories are equated, there doesn't seem to be a difference in weight loss, fat loss, most biomarkers of health—same thing for low-carb versus low-fat.

I'm not somebody who likes to demonize individual nutrients. I just haven't seen really compelling evidence that seed oils are the root cause of the problems that are being suggested.

If you are low in energy, your body is less likely to spare that protein for lean mass accrual because it's sensing an energy deficit. So, it's more likely to oxidize that protein or convert it to energy substrate, because, at the end of the day, if we're weighing two things, the first being survival and starvation versus building lean mass, I mean, there's just not the impetus to build a whole lot of lean mass if you're restricted.

If you look at the literature overall on exercise and appetite, it's not always what you'd expect. Consistently, it seems to show that exercise actually has an appetite-suppressant effect. So, people don't tend to compensate at least fully for the amount of movement they do.

If you look at the amount of lean mass that people lose while on Ozemoic or GLP-1 mimetics, it's very similar to the amount of lean mass the people lose when they just do diet with no resistance training or exercise.

There's some evidence that saturated fat may not be great for the microbiome—that it reduces the prevalence of some of the more positive strange of bacteria.

My suspicion is probably if you're getting, like, 2 to 3, high-quality protein meals in a day, you're getting the vast majority of the benefits of protein.

Honestly, people are going to laugh and be judgmental. I love popcorn. So, popcorn actually, is pretty darn high fiber.