Americans Want To Stop Being Fat And Unhappy But Don’t Know How

A new book released on Tuesday explains how Americans became so Fat and Unhappy and what to do about it.

EXCLUSIVE: Jillian Michaels on why you should NEVER take Ozempic



They’re expensive, cause an array of side effects, and eventually stop working.

And yet Ozempic and other GLP1 drugs are more popular than ever — touted by celebrities and prescribed to millions of Americans convinced they’ve found their last, best chance of losing weight.

To those not willing to risk their mental health and quality of life for fleeting victory in their struggle with the scale, Michaels has a message of hope: 'Weight loss is simple.'

Nonsense, claims fitness and nutrition influencer Jillian Michaels.

'Zero weight loss'

In an email to Align, Michaels explained why the powerful peptides, which were originally prescribed for Type 2 diabetes and other diseases, are not the best pound-shedding solution for most people.

“The bottom line — they are extremely expensive. You plateau on them. The side effects are scary and the risk of experiencing the more serious ones increases over time,” says Michaels.

The good news? “There is a natural alternative.”

Michaels’ observations about GLP1 drugs reflect the experience of many who have failed to see any progress on the medication. One such user recently called in to the "Mind Pump" fitness podcast: “I’d been on semaglutide [Ozempic] for about six months and saw zero weight loss ... it was very, very frustrating.”

He had slightly more success after switching to a different GLP1 drug, the caller said, but he was still worried about the long-term: “My big question here is, what do you do when they don’t work, and what do you do when they stop working?”

Short-term fix

According to Michaels, his case is far from unique. Citing a survey from one of the country's biggest pharmacy benefit managers, Prime Therapeutics, Michaels noted that “66% of the people put on GLP1 drugs come off them within the first year citing cost, plateau, and side effects. And the risk for more serious side effects actually compounds over time.”

Yet, people remain desperate for these “miracle” drugs, even opting for unvetted knockoffs from online pharmacies. Late last year, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration seized thousands of GLP1 products thought to be counterfeit, according to the New York Post.

Many consumers endanger themselves for what they believe offers their one shot at achieving a healthy weight. “That is simply just not true,” says Michaels, pointing to her record of helping thousands achieve these results with natural solutions.

Depression danger

While Michaels admits her way is not the easiest way, she does consider it the safest, scoffing at drugmakers’ claims that the long-term use of their products carries very little risk.

“I don’t even know how they arrive at that conclusion,” says Michaels. “The side effects are on the box because they are very legitimate.”

Those side effects include nausea, vomiting, blurred vision, stomach upset, and in more serious cases, pancreatitis or kidney failure. The drug has also been linked to over 100 deaths, according to the Daily Mail.

What’s even scarier? The thousands of cases reporting these adverse effects may just be the tip of the iceberg. “The FDA estimates that its Adverse Event Reporting System (AERS) only receives reports for 1–10% of adverse drug events,” says Michaels. The actual number of users experiencing harmful side effects could be tens of thousands more.

Michaels added that people are also more likely to be prescribed an antidepressant after starting a GLP1. This may have something to do with how the drug interacts with the brain’s “pleasure center.”

It’s hypothesized that these drugs impact dopamine release, making substances like food or drugs lose their appeal, continued Michaels. This benefits a person with addiction, Michaels says, but others open the door to depression, malaise, and lack of sex drive due to the same mechanism.

In short, Michaels believes these drugs are only right for a small minority of people such as the morbidly obese with a host of comorbidities or those battling addiction.

“For everyone else, these should NEVER be an option,” says Michaels.

A simpler way

To those not willing to risk their mental health and quality of life for fleeting victory in their struggle with the scale, Michaels has a message of hope: “Weight loss is simple.”

It all comes down to moving more and eating less. “Calories are units of energy. Energy that doesn’t get utilized from calorie intake gets stored as fat,” says Michaels.

In place of paying for Ozempic, Michaels recommends people spend money on goods and services that will encourage moving more and eating less: counseling, healthy food, and membership in a gym or other fitness community.

“Supporting yourself in all the ways possible inside and out goes a long way,” says Michaels.

Those who ditch Ozempic in favor of Michaels’ advice may find themselves experiencing a whole new range of positive “side effects,” including improved mental health, better sleep, and reduced chronic disease, according to a Mind Pump Media article.

Why do we still fall for the 'Blue Zones' longevity scam?



The quest for longevity is as old as human history itself. Who doesn’t want to live a long, vibrant life, free of illness and full of vitality?

For the past two decades, people around the world have bought books, watched documentaries, and enrolled in wellness programs sold by the man they're convinced holds the key to postponing mortality.

'The shared characterization of blue zones seems to be poverty, a poor lifestyle, and pressure to commit pension fraud.'

He's Dan Buettner, the National Geographic explorer who's claimed to have found the fountain of youth in far-flung "Blue Zones" — places like Okinawa, Japan, and Loma Linda, California — boasting greater-than-average populations of people who live to be 100 and beyond.

By popularizing and packaging this concept under his own brand, Buettner has turned these Blue Zones into a veritable fountain of money.

However, there’s just one problem with Blue Zones, and it’s a rather big one. The entire concept is built on questionable claims and even more questionable research.

Blue Zones or BS?

Dr. Saul Newman, a no-nonsense data scientist, enjoys nothing more than tearing down the myth of Blue Zones, exposing them as little more than a glorified wellness scam. The acerbic academic's takedown is far more compelling than Buettner's feel-good narrative.

Newman’s work, which recently earned him an Ig Nobel — an award given for research that first makes people laugh and then think — delivers a clear-eyed critique, highlighting the many problems with Buettner's baby.

Newman tells Align that these zones are directly “linked to lifestyle ideas that do not resemble the lived experience or dietary intake of people who actually live there. The shared characterization of Blue Zones seems to be poverty, a poor lifestyle, and pressure to commit pension fraud.”

Fake ages

Newman points out the glaring statistical inconsistencies that Buettner conveniently glosses over.

For starters, in Okinawa, one of Buettner's poster-child regions, authorities have uncovered rampant abuse of the pension system. Many of the supposed centenarians were either dead or had faked their ages to cash in on benefits.

When these fraudulent records were corrected, the number of centenarians plummeted.

Similarly, in Ikaria, Greece, another so-called Blue Zone, investigations into pension fraud revealed that, surprise, many “centenarians” were nowhere to be found. In Costa Rica, meanwhile, Newman notes that "42% of centenarians were found to be lying about their age. Once corrections were made, Costa Rica’s old-age life expectancy plummeted from world-leading to near the bottom of the pack.”

You really can’t make this up. Unless you’re Buettner, of course.

But it gets worse.

Okinawa, far from being a land of longevity miracles, now has the highest obesity rate for young people in Japan, along with elevated mortality rates among middle-aged residents. So much for that magical diet of tofu and fish keeping everyone spry well into their golden years.

Buettner’s Blue Zones don’t even boast the longest lifespans in their respective countries. There are regions in Japan and Italy that far surpass Okinawa and Sardinia in terms of average life expectancy.

Plant-based put-on

Newman's critique doesn’t stop at just exposing fraudulent records and statistical misdirection. He also targets Buettner’s entire methodology, which is, at best, sloppy and, at worst, deliberately misleading.

Take Buettner's "revolutionary" Power 9, little more than a recycled wellness checklist, cloaked in the mystique of exotic locales and clever branding. His approach, while dressed up as innovative, merely parrots well-known health tips.

None of these ideas are new. Some are downright silly. He advocates for a plant-based diet. Recent research suggests that plant-based diets may in fact harm rather than help long-term health.

Veganism, the most extreme form of plant-based living (or dying), is linked to serious health risks, including nervous system damage, skeletal and immune dysfunction, blood disorders, and mental health issues — all stemming from critical micro and macronutrient deficiencies.

Many plant-based foods, including popular meat-free alternatives like sausages, burgers, and nuggets, are often marketed as healthy options, yet they fall into the category of ultra-processed foods.

Drinking and thriving?

Buettner regularly promotes daily alcohol consumption as part of his longevity blueprint. But according to Newman, “There’s no amount of drinking that’s actually good for you.” He’s right; there’s not. In other words, if your health strategy involves drinking a glass of wine every night because some centenarian in Sardinia supposedly does it, you might want to rethink things.

Buettner’s success isn’t due to the scientific validity of his ideas but rather their sheer marketability. People love the notion of ancient, hidden wisdom that unlocks the secret to a long, healthy life. Buettner has masterfully tapped into our fear of death, turning Blue Zones into a lucrative empire that now even sells citywide "community" health programs. Quite an achievement, considering the whole concept is based more on fiction than fact.

Back to basics

The reality is that good health doesn’t require a passport to a Blue Zone or adherence to some mystical set of lifestyle rules.

It’s pretty basic, actually: Eat well, exercise regularly, get enough sleep, spend time in nature, and stay connected with your community. These habits are backed by decades of solid research, not folklore repackaged by a car salesman with a very fine tan.

However, despite being thoroughly debunked by experts like Newman, the Blue Zone charade persists, moving forward like an unkillable zombie racewalker. Singapore — a nation currently grappling with an obesity crisis — has just been declared the latest addition to the zonal family.

If you're still tempted to buy into the Buettnerian fantasy, it’s important to remember that behind every self-help guru's success story lies at least one inconvenient truth. In this case, it’s that Blue Zones are a neatly packaged myth designed to sell you products, not prolong your life.

As Newman puts it, "If you want good health advice, don’t buy a self-help cookbook that puts other cultures through a blender. Go talk to your doctor."

Or, you know, a trusted friend. A pastor. A Haitian migrant. Literally anyone but Dan Buettner.

Is MrBeast's 'healthy' Lunchly just the same old slop?



Influencers MrBeast, Logan Paul, and KSI aim to dominate the lunchroom with their new brand, Lunchly — which they say offers “healthier” fare than Oscar Mayer’s snack-time superstar Lunchables.

Some nutrition experts, however, say they’re full of it.

'This crap is not what kids need. The ingredients are nothing but sugar, seed oils, processed grains, and chemicals.'

Lunchly’s lunch kits combine MrBeast’s Feastables chocolate bars and Logan Paul and KSI’s Prime hydration drink along with pizza, nachos, or turkey and cheese cracker stacks for what the brand describes as “reimagined lunchtime fuel.”

Dubious claims

A visit to the Lunchly website shows a side-by-side comparison of the Lunchly products with the Lunchables version. Each Lunchly product contains less sugar, fewer calories, and additional electrolytes when measured against the competitor, seemingly supporting claims that the lunches are a healthier option for kids.

But according to health and nutrition advocate Calley Means, these numbers just mean Lunchly is pushing a smaller dose of poison.

“This crap is not what kids need,” the author and speaker posted on X. “The ingredients are nothing but sugar, seed oils, processed grains, and chemicals. There's a childhood chronic disease crisis. We have allies ready to work with you at any time on healthier options.”

Fellow wellness influencer Christopher McIlvaine, better known on social media as Cooking with Chris, was even more blunt: “Please don’t let your kids eat this,” he posted.

Sugar bomb

Align asked leading childhood nutrition researcher Dr. Michael Goran to give his take on the Lunchly lunches.

“I’m not going to have great things to say about this,” said Goran immediately after looking at the ingredients and nutrition label for “The Pizza” Lunchly. “It’s not something I would give my kids.”

Goran’s first critique was the added sugar in almost every component of the meal. He said items like pizza sauce did not need added sugar, and there are plenty of pizza sauces without them on the market. In place of a chocolate bar with added sugars, Goran recommends a whole fruit or unsweetened yogurt.

Moving to the Prime electrolyte drink, Goran called it "a bit of a mess,” noting that he advises against kids consuming alternative sweeteners such as the sucralose found in Prime. Instead, he offers water or sparkling water as a healthier option.

Brain drain

“Kids are particularly susceptible to added sugars, not just for the obvious effects like body weight or long-term risk for diabetes, but also for memory, concentration, ability to learn,” said Goran.

He elaborated that studies show energy spikes and dips from added sugars, making it difficult for kids to make it through the school day without feeling exhausted. Alternative sweeteners like sucralose show similar impacts on energy. Goran also noted that some oils in the ingredient list cause inflammation.

“I don't think there'd be many moms out there who would want to give these products to their kids,” concluded Goran, while acknowledging that many parents could be deceived by Lunchly’s dubious health claims.

“I think there's a problem because kids generally aren't taught nutrition in school. So there's this big mismatch,” said Dr. Goran.

Nutrition 101

This information gap is one of the reasons Dr. Goran wrote the book “Sugarproof,” which reveals the dangers of sugar to children’s health and teaches parents what to do about it. He hopes the book helps bridge the gap between nutrition research and parents’ understanding.

To make the information in his book more available, Dr. Goran has started hosting workshops and giving presentations at parent meetings. He is also looking into making a school-based program to teach about sugar consumption and nutrition.

As for influencers like the Lunchly trio, Goran said he’d like to see them use their reach more thoughtfully. “[They have the] potential to have a huge positive influence on future health and nutritional development and nutritional IQ of kids. Marketing these kinds of products is only going to make that worse.”

He also proposed “more guidelines and regulations on what can be marketed to kids nutritionally” as in other countries.

While Goran’s resident state of California will soon require school lunches to limit added sugars and other additives, products outside of school remain unregulated.

Adding that Lunchly kits did not look any better than school cafeteria meals, Dr. Goran said he would be happy to talk to the creators and help them with a redesign.

Ultimately, said Goran, parents rather than influencers and nutritionists have the final say. If you don’t think these lunches are healthy for your kids, don’t buy them, even if they ask. Your dollars influence the product marketplace. If creators keep expecting to profit off ultra-processed food like Lunchly, it’s only because consumers have yet to prove them wrong.

ROOKE: Republicans Are Winning A War The Left Started

They are no longer the side that cares about our health and safety

RFK At Senate Event: Big Health ‘Makes Money When Americans Get Sick’

A newfound vision for American health care presents the Republican Party with a ripe opportunity to drive change and bipartisanship in a divided era.

Stop Sending Your Kid To School With A Lunchbox Full Of Sugar

The choices we make today will affect our children for a lifetime.

Baby's first junk food: How companies prey on new parents



Almost two-thirds of supermarket baby food is unhealthy while nearly all baby food labels contain misleading marketing claims designed to "trick" parents.

Those are the conclusions of an eyebrow-raising study in which researchers at Australia's George Institute for Global Health analyzed 651 foods marketed for children ages 6 months to 36 months at 10 supermarket chains in the United States.

The study, published in the peer-reviewed journal Nutrients on Wednesday, found that 60% of the foods failed to meet nutritional standards set by the World Health Organization.

'Our findings highlight the urgent need for better regulation and guidance in the infant and toddler foods market in the United States - the health of future generations depends on it.'

In addition, 70% of the baby food failed to meet protein requirements, 44% exceeded total sugar recommendations, 25% failed to meet calorie recommendations, and 20% exceeded recommended sodium limits set by the WHO.

The study said the most concerning products were snack foods and pouches.

"Research shows 50% of the sugar consumed from infant foods comes from pouches, and we found those were some of the worst offenders,” said Dr. Elizabeth Dunford, senior study author and an adjunct assistant professor of nutrition at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.

Sales of such convenient baby food pouches soared 900% in the U.S.in the past 13 years, according to the study.

"These pouches are very worrisome. Children have to learn to chew, so they should be eating regular fruits, not pureed, sweetened things in a pouch. Often, these blends are not natural and much sweeter than real fruit, so the child’s being taught to only like super sweet things," said Dr. Mark Corkins, a University of Tennessee gastroenterologist and a chair of the American Academy of Pediatrics Committee on Nutrition.

Corkins noted that children not exposed to a variety of textures of food can "develop a texture aversion and will refuse anything but smooth, pureed types of foods."

According to the study, "Snack and finger foods, such as fruit bars, cereal bars, and puffed snacks, made up nearly 20% of products available for purchase in 2023, yet had some of the lowest compliance rates across the WHO's nutrition and promotional criteria. These foods contained low levels of protein and high levels of energy, sodium, and sugar and frequently contained added free sugars and sweeteners."

Dunford noted that consumption of processed foods in early childhood can set lifelong habits of poor eating that could lead to obesity, diabetes, and some cancers.

She continued, "Time-poor parents are increasingly choosing convenience foods, unaware that many of these products lack key nutrients needed for their child’s development and tricked into believing they are healthier than they really are."

The study also found that 99.4% of the baby food analyzed had misleading marketing claims on the labels that violated the WHO's promotional guidelines. On average, products contained four misleading marketing claims; some had as many as eleven.

The authors of the study wrote, "Common claims included ‘non genetically modified (GM)’ (70 percent), ‘organic’ (59 percent), ‘no BPA’ (37 percent), and ‘no artificial colors/flavors’ (25 percent)."

Dunford said these types of marketing advertisements can lead consumers to believe the product is more nutritious than it actually is.

Dr. Daisy Coyle — a research fellow at the George Institute and one of the authors of the study — said these marketing claims create a "health halo" around these products.

"The lack of regulation in this area leaves the door wide open for the food industry to deceive busy parents," Coyle explained. "We saw this not only in the use of misleading claims but also in the use of misleading names, where the product name did not reflect the main ingredients found on the ingredient list."

Childhood obesity has more than doubled in children and tripled in adolescents in the past three decades. There are nearly 15 million U.S. youths aged 2-19 years who have obesity, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Dunford declared, "Our findings highlight the urgent need for better regulation and guidance in the infant and toddler foods market in the United States – the health of future generations depends on it."

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Raw milk farms are being targeted by government officials carrying 'submachine guns' — doctor weighs in



For decades, we’ve been told pasteurizing milk kills harmful bacteria and reduces food borne illnesses. If that’s true, then where did all the hype around raw milk come from? Why is something that was long written off as dangerous suddenly the trendiest food on the market?

Dr. Paul Saladino, a double board certified MD, the host of the "Fundamental Health" podcast, and the leading authority on the carnivore diet, recently joined Dave Rubin on “The Rubin Report” to explain the truth behind the controversial beverage and why the government seems to have a big problem with it.

Getting to the Truth of the Raw Milk Debate | Paul Saladinowww.youtube.com

Apparently, raw milk is far safer than we’ve been led to believe, while pasteurized milk isn’t nearly as sanitary as the FDA claims.

According to Dr. Saladino, pasteurized milk is produced in “not the most sanitary conditions.”

“The udders are kind of close to the poop,” but “they know that milk is going to be pasteurized, so they don't really care if it gets contaminated,” he explains, noting that back in “1986, there was a huge outbreak of salmonella in pasteurized milk.”

In contrast, raw milk farms take far more sanitary precautions. He points to the largest producer of raw milk in the United States – Raw Farm, which is based in California.

“The folks at Raw Farm built a special barn so the cows have multiple showers” and “get the opportunity to poop and pee multiple times before they go to get milked, and their utters are cleaned; it’s very carefully monitored,” and “they test every single batch for contaminants,” Dr. Saladino tells Dave, adding that Raw Farms has “never had contamination.”

As for the alleged health benefits of raw milk, “multiple longitudinal observational studies” have shown that children who grow up drinking raw milk “have lower rates of asthma, eczema, and allergies.”

“Drinking raw milk probably is beneficial for kids programming their immune systems,” says Dr. Saladino, adding that “pasteurized dairy was probably something that triggered [his] eczema in the past.”

Further, “a lot of people who are lactose intolerant can drink it because different bacterial cultures in the milk can change the gut.”

So, if raw milk offers a range of health benefits, why is the FDA “denigrating it”?

Apparently at Raw Farm and other similar farms, government agents have shown up carrying “long barrel submachine guns” demanding that they “dump all the milk out.”

To learn more about what Dr. Saladino swears is a “war on raw milk” AND why raw milk has been connected to bird flu, watch the clip above.

Want more from Dave Rubin?

To enjoy more honest conversations, free speech, and big ideas with Dave Rubin, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.