"Behind the Scenes at NutritionFacts.org"
I'm often asked how long it takes me to come up with one of my daily videos.
Once the script is done, it doesn't take more than like ten hours
to create and record—it's the research phase that takes the most time.
I don't think people understand how much work that takes,
so I wanted to pull back the curtain and give everyone a little sneak peek.
If you go to pubmed.gov, where you can access the database
of the National Library of Medicine— the largest medical library in the world,
you can search for topics like diet or nutrition,
and you'll see that there's about a hundred thousand papers published every year
in the field of nutrition in the scientific medical literature.
That's more than 200 studies a day.
I can't read 200 studies a day, but 20 people could read 200 studies a day.
I don't want to miss a single important paper.
Then the next step is to look for what I call anchor articles.
These are the new studies around which I construct the videos.
I'm looking for novelty, practicality, and engagement.
Is it groundbreaking?
If it's just yet another study showing broccoli is good for you,
unless there's some new insight it probably won't make the cut.
Is it practical?
Is there some actionable information that can be used
to make real-world kitchen or grocery store decisions?
Who cares if there's some new whortleberry with medicinal properties
if it can only be foraged wild out in the Siberian tundra or something?
And finally, is there a way to make it interesting?
That's actually probably the greatest limiting factor.
There's lots of trailblazing new science with hands-on implications,
but unless I can find a way to make it captivating, to add humor or intrigue,
or solve some mystery, sadly it just kinds of goes by the wayside.
That's why we need like 10 different sites like this
so I can just pass those papers along and be like, "You try to make that interesting."
Once I have the anchor, then the real work begins.
Just because something is published in the peer reviewed medical literature
doesn't mean it's true.
There are studies funded by the National Confectioner's Association
that find that candy is just dandy.
Studies covertly funded by Coca-Cola, or the National Cattlemen's Beef Association.
That doesn't necessarily mean it's a flawed study,
but you have to give it that extra level of scrutiny.
You always have to follow the money.
Then you have to put the study in context.
For all I know that new study is some outlier or fluke.
Maybe there's 10 other studies out there that showed the exact opposite.
How else can we make life or death decisions
for ourselves and our families
but by the best available balance of evidence?
That's why every new study needs to be placed into context.
Easier said than done.
For example, let's say this paper lands in my inbox
arguing that fish oil increases the risk of cancer.
Now I could just make a video about it, just laying out the facts:
there was this paper published in a peer-reviewed scientific journal
that presented evidence that taking fish oil increases the risk of cancer.
Here's the paper, here's the link to download the paper,
here's all the evidence they present, in black and white, right in front of you,
here's their reasoning, their graphs, their charts, their diagrams.
This is the peer-reviewed medical literature, people.
Done.
No.
That's not good enough.
That does't answer the most important question of all: Is it actually true?
For all we know this guy is just cherry picking studies to fit some agenda.
It's not enough for us to just stick to the peer-reviewed science.
I want everything on NutritionFacts.org to reflect
the best available balance of evidence.
OK, so how do I figure that out?
Even if his arguments make sense based on the evidence he provides,
you have to make sure he's interpreting the evidence he cites correctly.
To do that you'd have to pull all the 76 sources he cites
to make sure he's not misquoting anything.
And what if each of those 76 papers cite 76 other papers?
And even if he correctly cited those 76 papers,
what about all the papers he didn't cite?
There have been more than 2,000 papers published on fish oil and cancer.
And look, this paper was published back in 2013.
What about the papers that have been published subsequently
that cited this particular paper?
And that's just one paper for one video.
You'll be glad you did do your due diligence though
because then you'd realize, hey, that fish oil paper got retracted.
Why?
Because the researcher evidently failed to disclose
he owned his own supplement company, which sold a competing oil supplement.
Again, that doesn't necessarily mean something's amiss,
but definitely requires additional scrutiny.
So anyways, bottom-line, ideally we do a comprehensive search
of the available literature to place any particular paper in context,
while also going backwards and forwards in time, checking out all the sources
they cited, and all the sources that cited them,
and we would do that anytime a paper is published on nutrition,
which, again happens a mere hundred thousand times a year.
NutritionFacts.org is a 501c3 nonprofit charity
that exists exclusively on donations from individuals like you.
It's like a Wikipedia model of just accepting donations from users
who appreciate the content, who appreciate what we're doing.
We reach so many millions of people that if one in a thousand
makes a small contribution, we're able to continue to thrive.
So if you feel like my work has enriched your life,
please consider supporting us by making a tax-deductible one-time,
or even better, monthly donation.
Regardless, even if you never give a penny, everything on the website
is and will always be free for all, for all time.
There's no members-only area where you can get additional life-saving information
—for a price.
There are no advertisements of any kind.
We don't accept corporate sponsorships.
The site is strictly non-commercial.
There's no line of Dr. Greger's brand Snakeoil Wonder Supplements.
Even all the money I get from my books and DVDs all go straight back into the site.
It's just a public service for those hungry for evidence-based nutrition.