Podcasts about tulleken

Join us as we discuss Ultra-Processed People by Chris van Tulleken. As we start a new year and new resolutions we decided to dive into this comprehensive read about what actually is in the food many of us eat every day. The science, marketing, and business models that surround what we consume is fascinating. We enjoyed learning about our food supply without being told what we should eat.We had a great time discussing this non-fiction read with a refreshing mocktail. Spa Water Mocktail5 oz organic coconut water1/2 oz lime juice (we used lime and lemon juice)4 cucumber slices4-6 mint leavessplash of sparkling waterWe added the cucumber, mint, and juice to a cocktail shaker and muddled. We added chilled coconut water, gave it a shake, and poured into wine goblets over ice. We topped it off with sparkling water. Here are the others books mentioned in this episode: Tom Lake by Ann PatchettBread of Angels by Patti SmithHigh Tea and Misdemeanors by Laura ChildsGuardian and a Thief by Megha MajumdarThe Lucky Ride by Yasushi KitagawaThe Elements by John BoyneThe Housemaid by Freida McFaddenThanks for joining us in the The Reading Lounge!

It's just Fi today as Jane remains in the North. Fi peels back the first door of our 'Jane and Fi Advent Calendar' and shares her favourite primary school banger... Plus, Dr. Chris van Tulleken, author of the bestseller 'Ultra-Processed People', discusses his upcoming live show. You can listen to our 'I've got the house to myself' playlist here: https://open.spotify.com/playlist/2MkG0A4kkX74TJuVKUPAuJ If you want to contact the show to ask a question and get involved in the conversation then please email us: janeandfi@times.radioFollow us on Instagram! @janeandfiPodcast Producer: Eve SalusburyExecutive Producer: Rosie Cutler Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The identical twins and broadcasting doctors, Chris and Xand van Tulleken, have been helping guide us through the world of medicine for years.From mums and dads on Radio 4's "What's Up Docs?" to children on their hugely popular "Operation Ouch!"What then will they prescribe us to listen to with their Inheritance Tracks.Inherited: Sabre Dance composed by Aram Khachaturian Xand - Passing on: Welcome to the Jungle by Guns N' Roses Chris - Escape (The Piña Colada Song) by Rupert HolmesProducer: Ben Mitchell

We're in the company of Ben Miller, comedian, actor, writer and some time student of physics...here to tell us how Father Christmas can in fact deliver a gift to every child in just one night with his new book "The Night I Met Father Christmas".Someone who has had an early Christmas present already is Lucy Steeds, who this week was crowned the winner of the Waterstones Book of the Year. She reveals the process of how her debut book, "The Artist", has become so successful - and how he channels her synaesthesia. Grace Vella spent her childhood dreaming of becoming a professional footballer, she almost made it playing for Liverpool and Man City, but didn't quite make the grade, so made football her business instead and has founded the women's sports brand Miss Kick.All that, plus Hollie McRae, daughter of iconic rally driver Colin McCrae, tells us how she has become determined to keep rally driving in the family - and we have the shared Inheritance Tracks of Chris and Xand van Tulleken.Presenter: Adrian Chiles Producer: Ben Mitchell Assistant Producer: Catherine Powell Researcher: Jesse Edwards Editor: Glyn Tansley

Today, Jenny and Mr. John dig into some new research and more real talk yet again! From optimal resistance training or results to ultraprocessed foods and putting an end to type 1 diabetes, the research is coming in hot! And don;t miss John's Real Talk about education in the fitness fields- it comes in many shapes and ways! Happy listening!References: 1. Comparable Strength and Hypertrophic Adaptations to Low-Load and High-Load Resistance Exercise Training in Trained Individuals: Many Roads Lead to RomeKristoffer Toldnes Cumming, Ingrid Cecelia Elvatun, Richard Kalenius, Gordan Divljak, Truls Raastad, Niklas Psilander, Oscar Horwath bioRxiv 2025.04.28.650925; doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2025.04.28.6509252. Samuel J. Dicken, Friedrich C. Jassil, Adrian Brown, Monika Kalis, Chloe Stanley, Chaniqua Ranson, Tapiwa Ruwona, Sulmaaz Qamar, Caroline Buck, Ritwika Mallik, Nausheen Hamid, Jonathan M. Bird, Alanna Brown, Benjamin Norton, Claudia A. M. Gandini Wheeler-Kingshott, Mark Hamer, Chris van Tulleken, Kevin D. Hall, Abigail Fisher, Janine Makaronidis, Rachel L. Batterham. Ultraprocessed or minimally processed diets following healthy dietary guidelines on weight and cardiometabolic health: a randomized, crossover trial. Nature Medicine, 2025; DOI: 10.1038/s41591-025-03842-03. Mayo Clinic. "This sugar molecule could stop type 1 diabetes, by fooling the immune system." ScienceDaily. www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2025/08/250802022917.htm (accessed August 2, 2025).

En su conversación sobre Ultra-Processed People: Why we Can't Stop Eating Food that isn't Food, Herlihy-Mera, Lahie Luna y Bustos Lemus utilizan el texto de van Tulleken para dialogar sobre la comida como una experiencia capitalista, el desarrollo de “Critical Food Studies”, la relación entre el ser humano y sus practicas alimenticias y cómo el diseño de estos productos puede funcionar como sustancias adictivas, entre otros temas. Episodio realizado por Jeffrey Herlihy-Mera, Universidad de Puerto Rico-Mayagüez, Marianne Lahaie Luna, Universidad de Toronto, y Angie Natalia Bustos Lemus, Universidad de Puerto Rico-Mayagüez. Este podcast y el Instituto Nuevos Horizontes son patrocinados por la Mellon Foundation. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

En su conversación sobre Ultra-Processed People: Why we Can't Stop Eating Food that isn't Food, Herlihy-Mera, Lahie Luna y Bustos Lemus utilizan el texto de van Tulleken para dialogar sobre la comida como una experiencia capitalista, el desarrollo de “Critical Food Studies”, la relación entre el ser humano y sus practicas alimenticias y cómo el diseño de estos productos puede funcionar como sustancias adictivas, entre otros temas. Episodio realizado por Jeffrey Herlihy-Mera, Universidad de Puerto Rico-Mayagüez, Marianne Lahaie Luna, Universidad de Toronto, y Angie Natalia Bustos Lemus, Universidad de Puerto Rico-Mayagüez. Este podcast y el Instituto Nuevos Horizontes son patrocinados por la Mellon Foundation. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

This week we're exploring the connection between what you eat and how you feel, from mood-boosting fibre to the foods that help sharpen focus and protect brain health. We unpack new research showing how high-intensity exercise fuels cognitive function and why short, consistent bursts of movement could be one of the best ways to support your mind. We break down the latest ban on "buy one, get one free" junk food deals and what it means for our weekly shop, plus dive into Joe Wicks' new documentary with Chris van Tulleken, where they expose how easy it is to market ultra-processed foods as healthy. We're also looking at the growing conversation around rapeseed oil, separating science from social media fearmongering, and sharing simple takeaways to help you protect your attention, eat for your mood, and move in a way that fuels both body and brain. Pre order Rhi's new book, The Fibre Formula: ⁠⁠https://geni.us/TheFibreFormula Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Reading Saabira's New York Times piece Throwaway Plastic Has Corrupted Us told me she saw more about plastic and its effect on our culture than most. A quote from it: "The social costs of our addiction to disposable plastics are more subtle but significant. Cooking skills have declined. Sit-down family meals are less common. Fast fashion, enabled by synthetic plastic fibers, is encouraging compulsive consumption and waste."Her tenure at the Wall Street Journal told me she would communicate it effectively, pulling no punches. As much as I prefer not to link to social media, this video review by Chris van Tulleken, bestselling author of Ultra-Processed People, is about as positive a review as I've seen, all the more since he clarifies that he doesn't know her.So I invited her to talk about her book Consumed: How Big Brands Got Us Hooked on Plastic. It launches today (October 7) in the US, so I've only finished the beginning, but it delivers. In our conversation, she describes what to expect when you read it, plus her back story driving her to write it.Many reviews describe her humor. You'll hear that I held back from asking her about how she worked humor into the topic, since she's not a comedian so I wouldn't expect to perform unprepared, but no worry, she made me laugh unprompted and shared more humor from the book. Obviously it's a serious topic, and Saabira's work shows how much more serious than you probably thought, but being depressed doesn't help solve it.Saabira's home pageHer New York Times piece that brought me to her: Throwaway Plastic Has Corrupted UsHer book page for ConsumedThe video review we mention by Chris van Tulleken, bestselling author of Ultra-Processed People Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

First up, we look at the absurdities of modern leadership with goofy governance. Liberal Democrat leader Sir Ed Davey has declared he won't attend Donald Trump's state banquet — a bold refusal of an invitation he never received. Mark and Pete explore what this reveals about the theatre of British politics and the problem of symbolic posturing in governance. Next, we turn to the tennis court. Daniil Medvedev lost his cool when a photographer strayed onto the court, showing how easily anger boils over in sport. But when is anger righteous, and when is it destructive? Pete reflects on biblical teaching about temper, from Jesus cleansing the Temple to Paul's warning not to let the sun go down on our wrath. Finally, posture comes under scrutiny. Scientist and BBC presenter Dr Xand van Tulleken has urged people to improve their posture for health's sake. Pete has tried this himself and shares why posture matters — not just physically, but spiritually, as Scripture calls us to stand firm in faith.Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/mark-and-pete--1245374/support.

Lots of talk these days about ultra-processed foods (UPFs). Along with confusion about what in the heck they are or what they're not, how bad they are for us, and what ought to be done about them. A landmark in the discussion of ultra-processed foods has been the publication of a book entitled Ultra-processed People, Why We Can't Stop Eating Food That Isn't Food. The author of that book, Dr. Chris van Tulleken, joins us today. Dr. van Tulleken is a physician and is professor of Infection and Global Health at University College London. He also has a PhD in molecular virology and is an award-winning broadcaster on the BBC. His book on Ultra-processed People is a bestseller. Interview Summary Chris, sometimes somebody comes along that takes a complicated topic and makes it accessible and understandable and brings it to lots of people. You're a very fine scientist and scholar and academic, but you also have that ability to communicate effectively with lots of people, which I very much admire. So, thanks for doing that, and thank you for joining us. Oh, Kelly, it's such a pleasure. You know, I begin some of my talks now with a clipping from the New York Times. And it's a picture of you and an interview you gave in 1995. So exactly three decades ago. And in this article, you just beautifully communicate everything that 30 years later I'm still saying. So, yeah. I wonder if communication, it's necessary, but insufficient. I think we are needing to think of other means to bring about change. I totally agree. Well, thank you by the way. And I hope I've learned something over those 30 years. Tell us, please, what are ultra-processed foods? People hear the term a lot, but I don't think a lot of people know exactly what it means. The most important thing to know, I think, is that it's not a casual term. It's not like 'junk food' or 'fast food.' It is a formal scientific definition. It's been used in hundreds of research studies. The definition is very long. It's 11 paragraphs long. And I would urge anyone who's really interested in this topic, go to the United Nations Food and Agricultural Organization website. You can type in NFAO Ultra and you'll get the full 11 paragraph definition. It's an incredibly sophisticated piece of science. But it boils down to if you as a consumer, someone listening to this podcast, want to know if the thing you are eating right now is ultra-processed, look at the ingredients list. If there are ingredients on that list that you do not normally find in a domestic kitchen like an emulsifier, a coloring, a flavoring, a non-nutritive sweetener, then that product will be ultra-processed. And it's a way of describing this huge range of foods that kind of has taken over the American and the British and in fact diets all over the world. How come the food companies put this stuff in the foods? And the reason I ask is in talks I give I'll show an ingredient list from a food that most people would recognize. And ask people if they can guess what the food is from the ingredient list. And almost nobody can. There are 35 things on the ingredient list. Sugar is in there, four different forms. And then there are all kinds of things that are hard to pronounce. There are lots of strange things in there. They get in there through loopholes and government regulation. Why are they there in the first place? So, when I started looking at this I also noticed this long list of fancy sounding ingredients. And even things like peanut butter will have palm oil and emulsifiers. Cream cheese will have xanthum gum and emulsifiers. And you think, well, wouldn't it just be cheaper to make your peanut butter out of peanuts. In fact, every ingredient is in there to make money in one of two ways. Either it drives down the cost of production or storage. If you imagine using a real strawberry in your strawberry ice cream. Strawberries are expensive. They're not always in season. They rot. You've got to have a whole supply chain. Why would you use a strawberry if you could use ethyl methylphenylglycidate and pink dye and it'll taste the same. It'll look great. You could then put in a little chunky bit of modified corn starch that'll be chewy if you get it in the right gel mix. And there you go. You've got strawberries and you haven't had to deal with strawberry farmers or any supply chain. It's just you just buy bags and bottles of white powder and liquids. The other way is to extend the shelf life. Strawberries as I say, or fresh food, real food - food we might call it rots on shelves. It decays very quickly. If you can store something at room temperature in a warehouse for months and months, that saves enormous amounts of money. So, one thing is production, but the other thing is the additives allow us to consume to excess or encourage us to consume ultra-processed food to excess. So, I interviewed a scientist who was a food industry development scientist. And they said, you know, most ultra-processed food would be gray if it wasn't dyed, for example. So, if you want to make cheap food using these pastes and powders, unless you dye it and you flavor it, it will be inedible. But if you dye it and flavor it and add just the right amount of salt, sugar, flavor enhancers, then you can make these very addictive products. So that's the logic of UPF. Its purpose is to make money. And that's part of the definition. Right. So, a consumer might decide that there's, you know, beneficial trade-off for them at the end of the day. That they get things that have long shelf life. The price goes down because of the companies don't have to deal with the strawberry farmers and things like that. But if there's harm coming in waves from these things, then it changes the equation. And you found out some of that on your own. So as an experiment you did with a single person - you, you ate ultra-processed foods for a month. What did you eat and how did it affect your body, your mood, your sleep? What happened when you did this? So, what's really exciting, actually Kelly, is while it was an n=1, you know, one participant experiment, I was actually the pilot participant in a much larger study that we have published in Nature Medicine. One of the most reputable and high impact scientific journals there is. So, I was the first participant in a randomized control trial. I allowed us to gather the data about what we would then measure in a much larger number. Now we'll come back and talk about that study, which I think was really important. It was great to see it published. So, I was a bit skeptical. Partly it was with my research team at UCL, but we were also filming it for a BBC documentary. And I went into this going I'm going to eat a diet of 80% of my calories will come from ultra-processed food for four weeks. And this is a normal diet. A lifelong diet for a British teenager. We know around 20% of people in the UK and the US eat this as their normal food. They get 80% of their calories from ultra-processed products. I thought, well, nothing is going to happen to me, a middle-aged man, doing this for four weeks. But anyway, we did it kind of as a bit of fun. And we thought, well, if nothing happens, we don't have to do a bigger study. We can just publish this as a case report, and we'll leave it out of the documentary. Three big things happened. I gained a massive amount of weight, so six kilos. And I wasn't force feeding myself. I was just eating when I wanted. In American terms, that's about 15 pounds in four weeks. And that's very consistent with the other published trials that have been done on ultra-processed food. There have been two other RCTs (randomized control trials); ours is the third. There is one in Japan, one done at the NIH. So, people gain a lot of weight. I ate massively more calories. So much so that if I'd continued on the diet, I would've almost doubled my body weight in a year. And that may sound absurd, but I have an identical twin brother who did this natural experiment. He went to Harvard for a year. He did his masters there. During his year at Harvard he gained, let's see, 26 kilos, so almost 60 pounds just living in Cambridge, Massachusetts. But how did you decide how much of it to eat? Did you eat until you just kind of felt naturally full? I did what most people do most of the time, which is I just ate what I wanted when I felt like it. Which actually for me as a physician, I probably took the breaks off a bit because I don't normally have cocoa pops for breakfast. But I ate cocoa pops and if I felt like two bowls, I'd have two bowls. It turned out what I felt like a lot of mornings was four bowls and that was fine. I was barely full. So, I wasn't force feeding myself. It wasn't 'supersize' me. I was eating to appetite, which is how these experiments run. And then what we've done in the trials. So, I gained weight, then we measured my hormone response to a meal. When you eat, I mean, it's absurd to explain this to YOU. But when you eat, you have fullness hormones that go up and hunger hormones that go down, so you feel full and less hungry. And we measured my response to a standard meal at the beginning and at the end of this four-week diet. What we found is that I had a normal response to eating a big meal at the beginning of the diet. At the end of eating ultra-processed foods, the same meal caused a very blunted rise in the satiety hormones. In the 'fullness' hormones. So, I didn't feel as full. And my hunger hormones remained high. And so, the food is altering our response to all meals, not merely within the meal that we're eating. Then we did some MRI scans and again, I thought this would be a huge waste of time. But we saw at four weeks, and then again eight weeks later, very robust changes in the communication between the habit-forming bits at the back of the brain. So, the automatic behavior bits, the cerebellum. Very conscious I'm talking to YOU about this, Kelly. And the kind of addiction reward bits in the middle. Now these changes were physiological, not structural. They're about the two bits of the brain talking to each other. There's not really a new wire going between them. But we think if this kind of communication is happening a lot, that maybe a new pathway would form. And I think no one, I mean we did this with very expert neuroscientists at our National Center for Neuroscience and Neurosurgery, no one really knows what it means. But the general feeling was these are the kind of changes we might expect if we'd given someone, or a person or an animal, an addictive substance for four weeks. They're consistent with, you know, habit formation and addiction. And the fact that they happened so quickly, and they were so robust - they remained the same eight weeks after I stopped the diet, I think is really worrying from a kid's perspective. So, in a period of four weeks, it re-altered the way your brain works. It affected the way your hunger and satiety were working. And then you ended up with this massive weight. And heaven knows what sort of cardiovascular effects or other things like that might have been going on or had the early signs of that over time could have been really pretty severe, I imagine. I think one of the main effects was that I became very empathetic with my patients. Because we did actually a lot of, sort of, psychological testing as well. And there's an experience where, obviously in clinic, I mainly treat patients with infections. But many of my patients are living with other, sort of, disorders of modern life. They live with excess weight and cardiovascular disease and type two diabetes and metabolic problems and so on. And I felt in four weeks like I'd gone from being in my early 30, early 40s at the time, I felt like I'd just gone to my early 50s or 60s. I ached. I felt terrible. My sleep was bad. And it was like, oh! So many of the problems of modern life: waking up to pee in the middle of the night is because you've eaten so much sodium with your dinner. You've drunk all this water, and then you're trying to get rid of it all night. Then you're constipated. It's a low fiber diet, so you develop piles. Pain in your bum. The sleep deprivation then makes you eat more. And so, you get in this vicious cycle where the problem didn't feel like the food until I stopped and I went cold turkey. I virtually have not touched it since. It cured me of wanting UPF. That was the other amazing bit of the experience that I write about in the book is it eating it and understanding it made me not want it. It was like being told to smoke. You know, you get caught smoking as a kid and your parents are like, hey, now you finish the pack. It was that. It was an aversion experience. So, it gave me a lot of empathy with my patients that many of those kinds of things we regard as being normal aging, those symptoms are often to do with the way we are living our lives. Chris, I've talked to a lot of people about ultra-processed foods. You're the first one who's mentioned pain in the bum as one of the problems, so thank you. When I first became a physician, I trained as a surgeon, and I did a year doing colorectal surgery. So, I have a wealth of experience of where a low fiber diet leaves you. And many people listening to this podcast, I mean, look, we're all going to get piles. Everyone gets these, you know, anal fishes and so on. And bum pain it's funny to talk about it. No, not the... it destroys people's lives, so, you know, anyway. Right. I didn't want to make light of it. No, no. Okay. So, your own experiment would suggest that these foods are really bad actors and having this broad range of highly negative effects. But what does research say about these things beyond your own personal experience, including your own research? So, the food industry has been very skillful at portraying this as a kind of fad issue. As ultra-processed food is this sort of niche thing. Or it's a snobby thing. It's not a real classification. I want to be absolutely clear. UPF, the definition is used by the World Health Organization and the United Nations Food and Agricultural Organization to monitor global diet quality, okay? It's a legitimate way of thinking about food. The last time I looked, there are more than 30 meta-analyses - that is reviews of big studies. And the kind of high-quality studies that we use to say cigarettes cause lung cancer. So, we've got this what we call epidemiological evidence, population data. We now have probably more than a hundred of these prospective cohort studies. And they're really powerful tools. They need to be used in conjunction with other evidence, but they now link ultra-processed food to this very wide range of what we euphemistically call negative health outcomes. You know, problems that cause human suffering, mental health problems, anxiety, depression, multiple forms of cancer, inflammatory diseases like Crohn's disease and ulcerative colitis, metabolic disease, cardiovascular disease, Alzheimer's and dementia. Of course, weight gain and obesity. And all cause mortality so you die earlier of all causes. And there are others too. So, the epidemiological evidence is strong and that's very plausible. So, we take that epidemiological evidence, as you well know, and we go, well look, association and causation are different things. You know, do matches cause cancer or does cigarettes cause cancer? Because people who buy lots of matches are also getting the lung cancer. And obviously epidemiologists are very sophisticated at teasing all this out. But we look at it in the context then of other evidence. My group published the third randomized control trial where we put a group of people, in a very controlled way, on a diet of either minimally processed food or ultra-processed food and looked at health outcomes. And we found what the other two trials did. We looked at weight gain as a primary outcome. It was a short trial, eight weeks. And we saw people just eat more calories on the ultra-processed food. This is food that is engineered to be consumed to excess. That's its purpose. So maybe to really understand the effect of it, you have to imagine if you are a food development engineer working in product design at a big food company - if you develop a food that's cheap to make and people will just eat loads of it and enjoy it, and then come back for it again and again and again, and eat it every day and almost become addicted to it, you are going to get promoted. That product is going to do well on the shelves. If you invent a food that's not addictive, it's very healthy, it's very satisfying, people eat it and then they're done for the day. And they don't consume it to excess. You are not going to keep your job. So that's a really important way of understanding the development process of the foods. So let me ask a question about industry and intent. Because one could say that the industry engineers these things to have long shelf life and nice physical properties and the right colors and things like this. And these effects on metabolism and appetite and stuff are unpleasant and difficult side effects, but the foods weren't made to produce those things. They weren't made to produce over consumption and then in turn produce those negative consequences. You're saying something different. That you think that they're intentionally designed to promote over consumption. And in some ways, how could the industry do otherwise? I mean, every industry in the world wants people to over consume or consume as much of their product as they can. The food industry is no different. That is exactly right. The food industry behaves like every other corporation. In my view, they commit evil acts sometimes, but they're not institutionally evil. And I have dear friends who work in big food, who work in big pharma. I have friends who work in tobacco. These are not evil people. They're constrained by commercial incentives, right? So, when I say I think the food is engineered, I don't think it. I know it because I've gone and interviewed loads of people in product development at big food companies. I put some of these interviewees in a BBC documentary called Irresistible. So rather than me in the documentary going, oh, ultra-processed food is bad. And everyone going, well, you are, you're a public health bore. I just got industry insiders to say, yes, this is how we make the food. And going back to Howard Moskovitz, in the 1970s, I think he was working for the Campbell Soup Company. And Howard, who was a psychologist by training, outlined the development process. And what he said was then underlined by many other people I've spoken to. You develop two different products. This one's a little bit saltier than the next, and you test them on a bunch of people. People like the saltier ones. So now you keep the saltier one and you develop a third product and this one's got a bit more sugar in it. And if this one does better, well you keep this one and you keep AB testing until you get people buying and eating lots. And one of the crucial things that food companies measure in product development is how fast do people eat and how quickly do they eat. And these kind of development tools were pioneered by the tobacco industry. I mean, Laura Schmidt has done a huge amount of the work on this. She's at University of California, San Francisco (UCSF), in California. And we know the tobacco industry bought the food industry and for a while in the '80s and '90s, the biggest food companies in the world were also the biggest tobacco companies in the world. And they used their flavor molecules and their marketing techniques and their distribution systems. You know, they've got a set of convenience tools selling cigarettes all over the country. Well, why don't we sell long shelf-life food marketed in the same way? And one thing that the tobacco industry was extremely good at was figuring out how to get the most rapid delivery of the drug possible into the human body when people smoke. Do you think that some of that same thing is true for food, rapid delivery of sugar, let's say? How close does the drug parallel fit, do you think? So, that's part of the reason the speed of consumption is important. Now, I think Ashley Gearhardt has done some of the most incredible work on this. And what Ashley says is we think of addictive drugs as like it's the molecule that's addictive. It's nicotine, it's caffeine, cocaine, diamorphine, heroin, the amphetamines. What we get addicted to is the molecule. And that Ashley says no. The processing of that molecule is crucially important. If you have slow-release nicotine in a chewing gum, that can actually treat your nicotine addiction. It's not very addictive. Slow-release amphetamine we use to treat children with attention and behavioral problems. Slow-release cocaine is an anesthetic. You use it for dentistry. No one ever gets addicted to dental anesthetics. And the food is the same. The rewarding molecules in the food we think are mainly the fat and the sugar. And food that requires a lot of chewing and is slow eaten slowly, you don't deliver the reward as quickly. And it tends not to be very addictive. Very soft foods or liquid foods with particular fat sugar ratios, if you deliver the nutrients into the gut fast, that seems to be really important for driving excessive consumption. And I think the growing evidence around addiction is very persuasive. I mean, my patients report feeling addicted to the food. And I don't feel it's legitimate to question their experience. Chris, a little interesting story about that concept of food and addiction. So going back several decades I was a professor at Yale, and I was teaching a graduate course. Ashley Gerhardt was a student in that course. And, she was there to study addiction, not in the context of food, but I brought up the issue of, you know, could food be addictive? There's some interesting research on this. It's consistent with what we're hearing from people, and that seems a really interesting topic. And Ashley, I give her credit, took this on as her life's work and now she's like the leading expert in the world on this very important topic. And what's nice for me to recall that story is that how fast the science on this is developed. And now something's coming out on this almost every day. It's some new research on the neuroscience of food and addiction and how the food is hijacking in the brain. And that whole concept of addiction seems really important in this context. And I know you've talked a lot about that yourself. She has reframed, I think, this idea about the way that addictive substances and behaviors really work. I mean it turns everything on its head to go the processing is important. The thing the food companies have always been able to say is, look, you can't say food is addictive. It doesn't contain any addictive molecules. And with Ashley's work you go, no, but the thing is it contains rewarding molecules and actually the spectrum of molecules that we can find rewarding and we can deliver fast is much, much broader than the traditionally addictive substances. For policy, it's vital because part of regulating the tobacco industry was about showing they know they are making addictive products. And I think this is where Ashley's work and Laura Schmidt's work are coming together. With Laura's digging in the tobacco archive, Ashley's doing the science on addiction, and I think these two things are going to come together. And I think it's just going to be a really exciting space to watch. I completely agree. You know when most people think about the word addiction, they basically kind of default to thinking about how much you want something. How much, you know, you desire something. But there are other parts of it that are really relevant here too. I mean one is how do you feel if you don't have it and sort of classic withdrawal. And people talk about, for example, being on high sugar drinks and stopping them and having withdrawal symptoms and things like that. And the other part of it that I think is really interesting here is tolerance. You know whether you need more of the substance over time in order to get the same reward benefit. And that hasn't been studied as much as the other part of addiction. But there's a lot to the picture other than just kind of craving things. And I would say that the thing I like about this is it chimes with my. Personal experience, which is, I have tried alcohol and cigarettes and I should probably end that list there. But I've never had any real desire for more of them. They aren't the things that tickle my brain. Whereas the food is a thing that I continue to struggle with. I would say in some senses, although I no longer like ultra-processed food at some level, I still want it. And I think of myself to some degree, without trivializing anyone's experience, to some degree I think I'm in sort of recovery from it. And it remains that tussle. I mean I don't know what you think about the difference between the kind of wanting and liking of different substances. Some scientists think those two things are quite, quite different. That you can like things you don't want, and you can want things you don't like. Well, that's exactly right. In the context of food and traditional substances of abuse, for many of them, people start consuming because they produce some sort of desired effect. But that pretty quickly goes away, and people then need the substance because if they don't have it, they feel terrible. So, you know, morphine or heroin or something like that always produces positive effects. But that initial part of the equation where you just take it because you like it turns into this needing it and having to have it. And whether that same thing exists with food is an interesting topic. I think the other really important part of the addiction argument in policy terms is that one counterargument by industrial scientists and advocates is by raising awareness around ultra-processed food we are at risk of driving, eating disorders. You know? The phenomenon of orthorexia, food avoidance, anorexia. Because all food is good food. There should be no moral value attached to food and we mustn't drive any food anxiety. And I think there are some really strong voices in the United Kingdom Eating Disorder scientists. People like Agnes Ayton, who are starting to say, look, when food is engineered, using brain scanners and using scientific development techniques to be consumed to excess, is it any wonder that people develop a disordered relationship with the food? And there may be a way of thinking about the rise of eating disorders, which is parallel to the rise of our consumption of ultra-processed food, that eating disorders are a reasonable response to a disordered food environment. And I think that's where I say all that somewhat tentatively. I feel like this is a safe space where you will correct me if I go off piste. But I think it's important to at least explore that question and go, you know, this is food with which it is very hard, I would say, to have a healthy relationship. That's my experience. And I think the early research is bearing that out. Tell us how these foods affect your hunger, how full you feel, your microbiome. That whole sort of interactive set of signals that might put people in harmony with food in a normal environment but gets thrown off when the foods get processed like this. Oh, I love that question. At some level as I'm understanding that question, one way of trying to answer that question is to go, well, what is the normal physiological response to food? Or maybe how do wild animals find, consume, and then interpret metabolically the food that they eat. And it is staggering how little we know about how we learn what food is safe and what food nourishes us. What's very clear is that wild mammals, and in fact all wild animals, are able to maintain near perfect energy balance. Obesity is basically unheard of in the wild. And, perfect nutritional intake, I mean, obviously there are famines in wild animals, but broadly, animals can do this without being literate, without being given packaging, without any nutritional advice at all. So, if you imagine an ungulate, an herbivore on the plains of the Serengeti, it has a huge difficulty. The carnivore turning herbivore into carnivore is fairly easy. They're made of the same stuff. Turning plant material into mammal is really complicated. And somehow the herbivore can do this without gaining weight, whilst maintaining total precision over its selenium intake, its manganese, its cobalt, its iron, all of which are terrible if you have too little and also terrible if you have too much. We understand there's some work done in a few wild animals, goats, and rats about how this works. Clearly, we have an ability to sense the nutrition we want. What we understand much more about is the sort of quantities needed. And so, we've ended up with a system of nutritional advice that says, well, just eat these numbers. And if you can stick to the numbers, 2,500 calories a day, 2300 milligrams of sodium, no more than 5% of your calories from free sugar or 10%, whatever it is, you know, you stick to these numbers, you'll be okay. And also, these many milligrams of cobalt, manganese, selenium, iron, zinc, all the rest of it. And obviously people can't really do that even with the packaging. This is a very long-winded answer. So, there's this system that is exquisitely sensitive at regulating micronutrient and energy intake. And what we understand, what the Academy understands about how ultra-processed food subverts this is, I would say there are sort of three or four big things that ultra-processed does that real food doesn't. It's generally very soft. And it's generally very energy dense. And that is true of even the foods that we think of as being healthy. That's like your supermarket whole grain bread. It's incredibly energy dense. It's incredibly soft. You eat calories very fast, and this research was done in the '90s, you know we've known that that kind of food promotes excessive intake. I guess in simple terms, and you would finesse this, you consume calories before your body has time to go, well, you've eaten enough. You can consume an excess. Then there's the ratios of fat, salt, and sugar and the way you can balance them, and any good cook knows if you can get the acid, fat, salt, sugar ratios right, you can make incredibly delicious food. That's kind of what I would call hyper palatability. And a lot of that work's being done in the states (US) by some incredible people. Then the food may be that because it's low in fiber and low in protein, quite often it's not satiating. And there may be, because it's also low in micronutrients and general nutrition, it may be that, and this is a little bit theoretical, but there's some evidence for this. Part of what drives the excess consumption is you're kind of searching for the nutrients. The nutrients are so dilute that you have to eat loads of it in order to get enough. Do you think, does that, is that how you understand it? It does, it makes perfect sense. In fact, I'm glad you brought up one particular issue because part of the ultra-processing that makes foods difficult for the body to deal with involves what gets put in, but also what gets taken out. And there was a study that got published recently that I think you and I might have discussed earlier on American breakfast cereals. And this study looked at how the formulation of them had changed over a period of about 20 years. And what they found is that the industry had systematically removed the protein and the fiber and then put in more things like sugar. So there, there's both what goes in and what gets taken out of foods that affects the body in this way. You know, what I hear you saying, and what I, you know, believe myself from the science, is the body's pretty capable of handling the food environment if food comes from the natural environment. You know, if you sit down to a meal of baked chicken and some beans and some leafy greens and maybe a little fruit or something, you're not going to overdo it. Over time you'd end up with the right mix of nutrients and things like that and you'd be pretty healthy. But all bets are off when these foods get processed and engineered, so you over consume them. You found that out in the experiment that you did on yourself. And then that's what science shows too. So, it's not like these things are sort of benign. People overeat them and they ought to just push away from the table. There's a lot more going on here in terms of hijacking the brain chemistry. Overriding the body signals. Really thwarting normal biology. Do you think it's important to add that we think of obesity as being the kind of dominant public health problem? That's the thing we all worry about. But the obesity is going hand in hand with stunting, for example. So, height as you reach adulthood in the US, at 19 US adults are something like eight or nine centimeters shorter than their counterparts in Northern Europe, Scandinavia, where people still eat more whole food. And we should come back to that evidence around harms, because I think the really important thing to say around the evidence is it has now reached the threshold for causality. So, we can say a dietary pattern high in ultra-processed food causes all of these negative health outcomes. That doesn't mean that any one product is going to kill you. It just means if this is the way you get your food, it's going to be harmful. And if all the evidence says, I mean, we've known this for decades. If you can cook the kind of meal, you just described at home, which is more or less the way that high income people eat, you are likely to have way better health outcomes across the board. Let me ask you about the title of your book. So, the subtitle of your book is Why We Can't Stop Eating Food That Isn't Food. So, what is it? The ultra-processed definition is something I want to pay credit for. It's really important to pay a bit of credit here. Carlos Montero was the scientist in Brazil who led a team who together came up with this definition. And, I was speaking to Fernanda Rauber who was on that team, and we were trying to discuss some research we were doing. And every time I said food, she'd correct me and go, it is not, it's not food, Chris. It's an industrially produced edible substance. And that was a really helpful thing for me personally, it's something it went into my brain, and I sat down that night. I was actually on the UPF diet, and I sat down to eat some fried chicken wings from a popular chain that many people will know. And was unable to finish them. I think our shared understanding of the purpose of food is surely that its purpose is to nourish us. Whether it's, you know, sold by someone for this purpose, or whether it's made by someone at home. You know it should nourish us spiritually, socially, culturally, and of course physically and mentally. And ultra-processed food nourishes us in no dimension whatsoever. It destroys traditional knowledge, traditional land, food culture. You don't sit down with your family and break, you know, ultra-processed, you know, crisps together. You know, you break bread. To me that's a kind of very obvious distortion of what it's become. So, I don't think it is food. You know, I think it's not too hard of a stretch to see a time when people might consider these things non-food. Because if you think of food, what's edible and whether it's food or not is completely socially constructed. I mean, some parts of the world, people eat cockroaches or ants or other insects. And in other parts of the world that's considered non-food. So just because something's edible doesn't mean that it's food. And I wonder if at some point we might start to think of these things as, oh my God, these are awful. They're really bad for us. The companies are preying on us, and it's just not food. And yeah, totally your book helps push us in that direction. I love your optimism. The consumer facing marketing budget of a big food company is often in excess of $10 billion a year. And depends how you calculate it. I'll give you a quick quiz on this. So, for a while, the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation was by far the biggest funder of research in the world on childhood obesity. And they were spending $500 million a year to address this problem. Just by which day of the year the food industry has already spent $500 million just advertising just junk food just to children. Okay, so the Robert V. Wood Foundation is spending it and they were spending that annually. Annually, right. So, what's, by what day of the year is the food industry already spent that amount? Just junk food advertising just to kids. I'm going to say by somewhere in early spring. No. January 4th. I mean, it's hysterical, but it's also horrifying. So, this is the genius of ultra-processed food, of the definition and the science, is that it creates this category which is discretionary. And so at least in theory, of course, for many people in the US it's not discretionary at all. It's the only stuff they can afford. But this is why the food industry hate it so much is because it offers the possibility of going, we can redefine food. And there is all this real food over there. And there is this UPF stuff that isn't food over here. But industry's very sophisticated, you know. I mean, they push back very hard against me in many different ways and forms. And they're very good at going, well, you're a snob. How dare you say that families with low incomes, that they're not eating food. Are you calling them dupes? Are you calling them stupid? You know, they're very, very sophisticated at positioning. Isn't it nice how concerned they are about the wellbeing of people without means? I mean they have created a pricing structure and a food subsidy environment and a tax environment where essentially people with low incomes in your country, in my country, are forced to eat food that harms them. So, one of the tells I think is if you're hearing someone criticize ultra-processed food, and you'll read them in the New York Times. And often their conflicts of interest won't be reported. They may be quite hidden. The clue is, are they demanding to seriously improve the food environment in a very clear way, or are they only criticizing the evidence around ultra-processed food? And if they're only criticizing that evidence? I'll bet you a pound to a pinch of salt they'll be food-industry funded. Let's talk about that. Let's talk about that a little more. So, there's a clear pattern of scientists who take money from industry finding things that favor industry. Otherwise, industry wouldn't pay that money. They're not stupid in the way they invest. And, you and I have talked about this before, but we did a study some years ago where we looked at industry and non-industry funded study on the health effects of consuming sugar sweetened beverages. And it's like the ocean parted. It's one of my favorites. And it was something like 98 or 99% of the independently funded studies found that sugar sweetened beverages do cause harm. And 98 or 99% of the industry funded studies funded by Snapple and Coke and a whole bunch of other companies found that they did not cause harm. It was that stark, was it? It was. And so you and I pay attention to the little print in these scientific studies about who's funded them and who might have conflicts of interest. And maybe you and I and other people who follow science closely might be able to dismiss those conflicted studies. But they have a big impact out there in the world, don't they? I had a meeting in London with someone recently, that they themselves were conflicted and they said, look, if a health study's funded by a big sugary drink company, if it's good science, that's fine. We should publish it and we should take it at face value. And in the discussion with them, I kind of accepted that, we were talking about other things. And afterwards I was like, no. If a study on human health is funded by a sugary drink corporation, in my opinion, we could just tear that up. None of that should be published. No journals should publish those studies and scientists should not really call themselves scientists who are doing it. It is better thought of as marketing and food industry-funded scientists who study human health, in my opinion, are better thought of as really an extension of the marketing division of the companies. You know, it's interesting when you talk to scientists, and you ask them do people who take money from industry is their work influenced by that money? They'll say yes. Yeah, but if you say, but if you take money from industry, will your work be influenced? They'll always say no. Oh yeah. There's this tremendous arrogance, blind spot, whatever it is that. I can remain untarnished. I can remain objective, and I can help change the industry from within. In the meantime, I'm having enough money to buy a house in the mountains, you know, from what they're paying me, and it's really pretty striking. Well, the money is a huge issue. You know, science, modern science it's not a very lucrative career compared to if someone like you went and worked in industry, you would add a zero to the end of your salary, possibly more. And the same is true of me. I think one of the things that adds real heft to the independent science is that the scientists are taking a pay cut to do it. So how do children figure in? Do you think children are being groomed by the industry to eat these foods? A senator, I think in Chile, got in hot water for comparing big food companies to kind of sex offenders. He made, in my view, a fairly legitimate comparison. I mean, the companies are knowingly selling harmful products that have addictive properties using the language of addiction to children who even if they could read warning labels, the warning labels aren't on the packs. So, I mean, we have breakfast cereals called Crave. We have slogans like, once you stop, once you pop, you can't stop. Bet you can't just eat one. Yeah, I think it is predatory and children are the most vulnerable group in our society. And you can't just blame the parents. Once kids get to 10, they have a little bit of money. They get their pocket money, they're walking to school, they walk past stores. You know, you have to rely on them making decisions. And at the moment, they're in a very poor environment to make good decisions. Perhaps the most important question of all what can be done. So, I'm speaking to you at a kind of funny moment because I've been feeling that a lot of my research and advocacy, broadcasting... you know, I've made documentaries, podcasts, I've written a book, I've published these papers. I've been in most of the major newspapers and during the time I've been doing this, you know, a little under 10 years I've been really focused on food. Much less time than you. Everything has got worse. Everything I've done has really failed totally. And I think this is a discussion about power, about unregulated corporate power. And the one glimmer of hope is this complaint that's been filed in Pennsylvania by a big US law firm. It's a very detailed complaint and some lawyers on behalf of a young person called Bryce Martinez are suing the food industry for causing kidney problems and type two diabetes. And I think that in the end is what's going to be needed. Strategic litigation. That's the only thing that worked with tobacco. All of the science, it eventually was useful, but the science on its own and the advocacy and the campaigning and all of it did no good until the lawyers said we would like billions and billions of dollars in compensation please. You know, this is an exciting moment, but there were a great many failed lawsuits for tobacco before the master settlement agreement in the '90s really sort of changed the game. You know, I agree with you. Are you, are you optimistic? I mean, what do you think? I am, and for exactly the same reason you are. You know, the poor people that worked on public health and tobacco labored for decades without anything happening long, long after the health consequences of cigarette smoking were well known. And we've done the same thing. I mean, those us who have been working in the field for all these years have seen precious little in the ways of policy advances. Now tobacco has undergone a complete transformation with high taxes on cigarettes, and marketing restrictions, and non-smoking in public places, laws, and things like that, that really have completely driven down the consumption of cigarettes, which has been a great public health victory. But what made those policies possible was the litigation that occurred by the state attorneys general, less so the private litigating attorneys. But the state attorneys general in the US that had discovery documents released. People began to understand more fully the duplicity of the tobacco companies. That gave cover for the politicians to start passing the policies that ultimately made the big difference. I think that same history is playing out here. The state attorneys general, as we both know, are starting to get interested in this. I say hurray to that. There is the private lawsuit that you mentioned, and there's some others in the mix as well. I think those things will bring a lot of propel the release of internal documents that will show people what the industry has been doing and how much of this they've known all along. And then all of a sudden some of these policy things like taxes, for example, on sugared beverages, might come in and really make a difference. That's my hope. But it makes me optimistic. Well, I'm really pleased to hear that because I think in your position it would be possible. You know, I'm still, two decades behind where I might be in my pessimism. One of the kind of engines of this problem to me is these conflicts of interest where people who say, I'm a physician, I'm a scientist, I believe all this. And they're quietly paid by the food industry. This was the major way the tobacco industry had a kind of social license. They were respectable. And I do hope the lawsuits, one of their functions is it becomes a little bit embarrassing to say my research institute is funded [by a company that keeps making headlines every day because more documents are coming out in court, and they're being sued by more and more people. So, I hope that this will diminish the conflict, particularly between scientists and physicians in the food industry. Because that to me, those are my biggest opponents. The food industry is really nice. They throw money at me. But it's the conflicted scientists that are really hard to argue with because they appear so respectable. Bio Dr. Chris van Tulleken is a physician and a professor of Infection and Global Health at University College London. He trained at Oxford and earned his PhD in molecular virology from University College London. His research focuses on how corporations affect human health especially in the context of child nutrition and he works with UNICEF and The World Health Organization on this area. He is the author of a book entitled Ultraprocessed People: Why We Can't Stop Eating Food That Isn't Food. As one of the BBC's leading broadcasters for children and adults his work has won two BAFTAs. He lives in London with his wife and two children.

In Folge 487 des beVegt-Podcast gibt's Teil 2 der spannendsten, überraschendsten und erschreckendsten Erkenntnisse, die wir aus dem Buch „Ultra-Processed People“ von Chris van Tulleken mitgenommen haben. Shownotes: https://www.bevegt.de/ultra-processed-people-podcast-2/ Werbepartner dieser Folge: BookBeat (hol dir 60 Tage BookBeat gratis mit dem Gutscheincode BEVEGT)  Werde beVegt-Supporter*in: https://www.bevegt.de/unterstuetzen/ Hol dir den kostenlosen Newsletter: https://www.bevegt.de/newsletter/ Komm in unsere Online-Community: https://community.bevegt.de/ Unsere E-Books und Kurse: Schaffe den Einstieg ins Laufen mit LAUFSTART Laufe deinen ersten oder schnellsten (Halb-)Marathon mit FINISHER Verdoppele deine Beweglichkeit mit STRETCH Starte die Küchenrevolution mit unseren Grain-Green-Bean Kochbüchern

At the age of twenty-two, Dr Grace Spence Green's spine was broken at the fourth thoracic vertebra. One day, she was in hospital supporting patients, the next she was fighting for her own life. As Grace came to understand her new life as a wheelchair user, she also had to reconceptualise how she could be both a doctor and a patient, and her now deeply personal understanding of society's persistent ableism. She joins Dr Xand van Tulleken to share her journey, from how people's perception of her post-injury changed dramatically due to ableist mindsets, to how her own experience navigating the medical system as a patient helped her better understand her own patients, to how her patients have in turn helped her in surprising and deeply human reciprocity. Grace shares her own passion for disability advocacy, and calls for us all to change the narrative about disability and ableism. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

In Folge 485 des beVegt-Podcast sprechen wir über die spannendsten, überraschendsten und erschreckendsten Erkenntnisse, die wir aus dem Buch „Ultra-Processed People“ von Chris van Tulleken mitgenommen haben. Shownotes: https://www.bevegt.de/ultra-processed-people-podcast-1/ Unser Supplemente-Partner: FormMed (5€ Neukunden-Rabatt mit den Gutscheincode "bevegt5") Werde beVegt-Supporter*in: https://www.bevegt.de/unterstuetzen/ Hol dir den kostenlosen Newsletter: https://www.bevegt.de/newsletter/ Komm in unsere Online-Community: https://community.bevegt.de/  

Beyond the neglectful state: unpacking the intersection of public health and personal freedom In this episode of Public Health Disrupted, hosts Xand van Tulleken and Professor Rochelle Burgess tackle the concept of the "nanny state". Alongside guests Adam Briggs and Professor James Wilson, they delve into the delicate balance between government intervention and individual freedom in the realm of public health. The conversation explores how public health policies can sometimes be perceived as overreaching, despite the evidence suggesting that the public largely supports such initiatives. Our guests unpack the historical context of the term "nanny state," its implications, and the ongoing debate about the role of government in promoting health while respecting personal autonomy. Guests: - Dr Adam Briggs, Senior Policy Fellow at the Health Foundation - Professor James Wilson, Professor of Philosophy at UCL In this episode: - The origins and evolution of the "nanny state" rhetoric and its impact on public health discourse. - Insights into public opinion on government intervention in health-related issues, including obesity and smoking. - The importance of framing public health initiatives in a way that resonates with communities and policymakers alike. - How a shift towards prevention can be achieved through approaches that embed health considerations across all areas of government. This conversation invites us all to reconsider the narratives surrounding public health policies and the responsibilities of both the state and individuals in fostering a healthier society. Date of episode recording: 2025-05-12T00:00:00Z Duration: 00:43:51 Language of episode: English Presenter:Professor Rochelle Burgess; Dr Xand van Tulleken Guests: Dr Adam Briggs; Professor James Wilson Producer: Produced by: UCL Health of the Public; Editor: Annabelle Buckland, Decibelle Creative

What are ultra-processed foods really doing to our health, our kids and our food culture? In this powerful episode of Food Rebels, AJ Sharp sits down with Dr. Dolly van Tulleken to unpack the rise of UPFs and the complex mix of politics, marketing and industry influence that keeps them on our plates. Dolly shares her journey into food policy, reveals how government decisions are shaped behind closed doors and challenges the cultural norms that disconnect us from real food. From school meals to supermarket shelves, this episode exposes how the system works and what needs to change.  

In this episode of Public Health Disrupted, hosts Xand van Tulleken and Rochelle Burgess dive into how we form beliefs, and how they shape our understanding of critical public health issues. From vaccination hesitancy to climate change, the episode explores the psychological mechanisms that lead to entrenched views and the challenges of changing minds. Joining them are Mia Forbes Pirie, a leading international mediator, and Dr. Kris De Meyer, Director of the UCL Climate Action Unit. Together, they share their insights on effective communication strategies that prioritise relationship-building over persuasion, emphasising the importance of empathy and understanding in discussions surrounding contentious topics. In this episode: - How beliefs are formed and why they can become entrenched. - The role of cultural identity in shaping opinions and the fear of social rejection. - Practical strategies for engaging with differing viewpoints and fostering meaningful dialogue. Public Health Disrupted is produced by UCL Health of the Public and edited by Annabelle Buckland at Decibelle Creative / @decibelle_creative. Transcription link: https://www.ucl.ac.uk/health-of-public/news-and-events/public-health-disrupted/season-5-ep-2-listening-connect-notes-and-transcript Date of episode recording: 2025-03-10T00:00:00Z Duration: 00:42:35 Language of episode: English Presenter:Xand van Tulleken; Rochelle Burgess Guests: Mia Forbes Pirie; Kris De Meyer Producer: Fran Goldman (Producer) Annabelle Buckland (Editor)

In their new BBC Radio 4 podcast, Drs Chris and Xand are on a mission to help us take better care of ourselves.

You need to pinky swear you listened to the previous episode before you listen to this one. We're trusting you.Links:Season 2, Episode 2: We're Stronger Than the FireLebanon Bologna (Sausagepedia)Episode 41: The Bikini-Industrial ComplexGood Calories, Bad Calories by Gary TaubesEvery Time Brennan Has Talked About Loving Heavy Food [Compilation] (from Gastronauts on dropout.tv, this is on Youtube)Salt Sugar Fat by Michael MossUltra-Processed People by Chris van Tulleken

In their new BBC Radio 4 podcast, Drs Chris and Xand are on a mission to help us take better care of ourselves.

Ultra-processed food is the new cigarette—and it's fueling a global health crisis hiding in plain sight. In today's episode, I'm joined by Dr. Chris van Tulleken—infectious disease physician, BBC broadcaster, and author of Ultra-Processed People—to expose the truth behind ultra-processed foods and the industries driving their consumption. To find out what this food is really doing to us, Dr. van Tulleken became the first subject in a groundbreaking clinical trial—eating 80% of his calories from ultra-processed food for a full month. We unpack what makes ultra-processed food fundamentally different from real food—even when the ingredients look similar, and why its impact on your brain, metabolism, and long-term health is far worse than anyone thought… You'll learn: How ultra-processed food hijacks your brain's reward system The science behind food addiction and satiety hormones Why food labels and front-of-package claims are designed to mislead you What the latest data says about UPFs and 32 chronic diseases The global policy movements and lawsuits now underway to fight back This episode is part science, part exposé, and a wake-up call for anyone who thinks food is just about calories and willpower. If you care about your health, your kids, or the future of our food system, you need to hear this. https://linktr.ee/ultraprocessedpeople View Show Notes From This Episode Get Free Weekly Health Tips from Dr. Hyman https://drhyman.com/pages/picks?utm_campaign=shownotes&utm_medium=banner&utm_source=podcast Sign Up for Dr. Hyman's Weekly Longevity Journal https://drhyman.com/pages/longevity?utm_campaign=shownotes&utm_medium=banner&utm_source=podcast

Welcome back to a brand new season of Public Health Disrupted! As Rochelle makes her return to the podcast following maternity leave, we're excited to present the very first episode of Season 5: a fascinating examination and celebration of the power of movement to foster connection and belonging. This episode will be of particular interest to runners and fans of group or community exercising, or simply those interested in the intersection of public health and community engagement. Xand Van Tulleken and Professor Rochelle Burgess delve into the transformative world of community fitness events, particularly the groundbreaking success of Parkrun. They explore how grassroots initiatives are reshaping not only individual lives but entire communities by breaking down barriers to exercise and fostering social connections. Joining them are Dr. Flaminia Ronca, leading expert in exercise neuroscience, and Chrissie Wellington OBE, a four-time world Ironman champion and former global head of health and wellbeing for Parkrun. In this episode: - the profound impact of community fitness on mental and emotional wellbeing - the science behind exercise and brain health - inspiring stories of how Parkrun has created inclusive spaces for all. Public Health Disrupted, hosted by Dr Rochelle Burgess and Xand Van Tulleken is edited by Annabelle Buckland at Decibelle Creative / @decibelle_creative Transcript: https://www.ucl.ac.uk/health-of-public/news-and-events/public-health-disrupted/season-5-ep-1-running-together-notes-and-transcript Date of episode recording: 2025-03-03T00:00:00Z Duration: 00:40:26 Language of episode: English TAGS: #PublicHealthDisrupted #UCLHealthPublic Presenter:Xand van Tulleken; Rochelle Burgess Guests: Chrissie Wellington OBE; Flaminia Ronca Producer: Anabelle Buckland

For today's Classic Debate we're revisiting our 2018 debate "Parenting Doesn't Matter (Or Not As Much As You Think)". We were joined by Professor of Behavioural Genetics Robert Plomin, the Developmental Clinical Psychologist Susan Pawlby, therapist, parenting counsellor and broadcaster Ann Pleshette Murphy, and Stuart Ritchie, lecturer in social genetics and developmental psychiatry and author of Science Fictions. Hosting the debate was Doctor and broadcaster, Dr Xand van Tulleken. ------- If you'd like to become a Member and get access to all our full ad free conversations, plus all of our Members-only content, just visit intelligencesquared.com/membership to find out more. For £4.99 per month you'll also receive: - Full-length and ad-free Intelligence Squared episodes, wherever you get your podcasts - Bonus Intelligence Squared podcasts, curated feeds and members exclusive series - 15% discount on livestreams and in-person tickets for all Intelligence Squared events  ...  Or Subscribe on Apple for £4.99: - Full-length and ad-free Intelligence Squared podcasts - Bonus Intelligence Squared podcasts, curated feeds and members exclusive series … Already a subscriber? Thank you for supporting our mission to foster honest debate and compelling conversations! Visit intelligencesquared.com to explore all your benefits including ad-free podcasts, exclusive bonus content and early access. … Subscribe to our newsletter here to hear about our latest events, discounts and much more. https://www.intelligencesquared.com/newsletter-signup/ Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

This week, I'm thrilled to welcome Paul Wheat, a dedicated 55-year-old triathlete who exemplifies what it means to be a High Performance Human. For Paul, high performance transcends athletic excellence; it encompasses all aspects of life, including sleep, nutrition, exercise, relationships, and mental health. The beauty of this journey is that you don't need to be a top-tier athlete to excel in these areas. Paul's transformative journey began in 2020 when he joined my SWAT Inner Circle after experimenting with a complimentary 12-week plan amid the COVID pandemic. The structured approach not only challenged him but also revealed the vital connections between fitness, nutrition, sleep, and work habits. Like many, Paul was once caught in the cycle of stress and fatigue from constant travel as a manager. However, he took proactive steps by applying training principles from SWAT, incorporating the 80:20 Pareto principle, and catalyzing a substantial transformation in both his personal life and professional environment. One of Paul's standout achievements has been the establishment of a workplace culture that encourages his team to maintain a healthy work-life balance, limiting work to eight hours a day. This impactful change has led to enhanced productivity and notably reduced staff turnover. Over the past five years, Paul has made impressive strides in his athletic performance, significantly improving his 70.3 Ironman time by 75 minutes—down from 6:45 to 5:30. Additionally, he has shed 19 kg, proudly stating that he achieved this by “cleaning up what I eat, understanding that processed foods aren't real food, and being more active.” If you're inspired to embark on a lifestyle transformation in 2025, Paul's journey is sure to motivate you! In this episode, we'll explore: The lifestyle changes Paul implemented and their impact on his health. How these changes elevated his triathlon performance. The process of integrating healthy habits within his work team. The positive effects of these workplace changes on overall performance. Paul's top three pieces of advice for anyone looking to start a similar journey. Join us for an enlightening conversation that could kickstart your own path to high performance! Paul doesn't do social media so you can't follow him but if you'd like to get a feel for how he has upped his game he recommends the following books: Ultra-Processed People:The Definitive #1 Bestseller You Need to Understand Ultra-Processed Food by Chris can Tulleken. Never Split the Difference: Negotiating as if Your Life Depended on It by Chris Voss.   He also loves to listen to THIS podcast Things People Do with Joe Marler ***Join our SWAT/High Performance Human tribe using this link, with a happiness guarantee! You can watch a brief video about the group by going to our website here, and join our SWAT High Performance Human tribe here. You can find all of my social media links HERE: You'll also find some really great content on my Instagram and YouTube! Instagram  YouTube   **To get a free copy of my personal daily mobility routine, please click HERE** **To download your FREE infographic ‘7 steps to swimming faster', please click HERE  Sign up for Simon's weekly newsletter Sign up for Beth's weekly newsletter To contact Beth regarding Life Coaching, please visit her website at BethanyWardLifeCoaching.uk. If you would like to help offset the cost of our podcast production, we would be so grateful. Please click here to support the HPH podcast. Thank you! Visit Simon's website for more information about his coaching programmes.  For any questions please email Beth@TheTriathlonCoach.com.

This week is a special episode of the podcast where we are looking back on some of our favourite pieces from the magazine over the past year and revisiting some of the conversations we had around them. First up: the Starmer supremacy Let's start with undoubtedly the biggest news of the year: Starmer's supermajority and the first Labour government in 14 years. In April, we spoke to Katy Balls and Harriet Harman about just what a supermajority could mean for Keir Starmer. Listening back, it's an incredibly interesting discussion to revisit. The aim of Katy's piece was to communicate the internal problems that could arise from such a sweeping victory and, crucially, how Starmer might manage a historic cohort of backbenchers. One MP who knows about adjusting to life in government after a supermajority is Harriet Harman, former leader of the Labour party and a member of Tony Blair's first cabinet. (01:51) Reflections from the editor's chair The change in No. 10 Downing Street is, of course, not the only notable shake-up in Westminster this year. Fraser Nelson stepped down as editor of The Spectator in September after 15 years of wielding the editor's pen, with 784 issues to his name. We sat down with him on his final day in the office to reflect on his time at 22 Old Queen Street. (08:31) Do historians talk down to children? In June, Mary Wakefield dedicated her column to this very question. She wrote about her experience trying to find engaging and challenging history books for her 8-year-old and compared the dumbed-down, one-dimensional version of history portrayed in modern children's books with the classic Ladybird books of the 1960s. She joined the podcast to discuss this with Dominic Sandbrook, author of the Adventures in Time children's book series and host of The Rest is History podcast. (17:18) Are ultra-processed foods really so bad? On The Edition podcast, we enjoy a fiery debate, and none was more heated than our discussion on ultra-processed foods. This debate, between columnist Matthew Parris and Christoffer van Tulleken, associate professor at UCL and author of the bestselling book Ultra-Processed People, took place in May. It was sparked by Matthew's column on the myths surrounding ultra-processed foods—foods engineered to be hyper-palatable and typically containing preservatives, emulsifiers, sweeteners, artificial colours, flavours, and so on. Such additives are widely considered detrimental to our health. Matthew says we shouldn't be worried, but we'll let you decide. (29:10) By whose values should we judge the past? On the podcast, we showcase articles from across the magazine—from the front half to the life pages, to books and arts. One of the most intriguing books of the year was Joan Smith's Unfortunately, she was a nymphomaniac: A New History of Rome's Imperial Women. An eye-catching title that is ‘as thought-provoking as it is provocative', as Daisy Dunn wrote in October. Many popular historians are singled out for their analysis of women in ancient Rome, including Professor Dame Mary Beard. In the interest of granting a right of reply, we invited Mary onto the podcast to discuss the merit of judging history by today's standards. (49:40) And finally: the politics of the breakfast buffet We thought we would leave you with one of the most prescient discussions we had on the podcast this year: the politics of the hotel breakfast buffet. Is it ethical to pocket a sandwich at a hotel breakfast buffet? Laurie Graham explored that question in the magazine back in September. Specifically, she revealed the very British habit of swiping food from free breakfasts to save for lunch later in the day. Laurie joined us alongside Mark Jenkins, a former hotel manager in Torquay, whom listeners may remember from the Channel 4 documentary The Hotel. (01:04:04) Hosted by William Moore and Lara Prendergast. Produced by Oscar Edmondson and Patrick Gibbons. 

This week is a special episode of the podcast where we are looking back on some of our favourite pieces from the magazine over the past year and revisiting some of the conversations we had around them. First up: the Starmer supremacy Let's start with undoubtedly the biggest news of the year: Starmer's supermajority and the first Labour government in 14 years. In April, we spoke to Katy Balls and Harriet Harman about just what a supermajority could mean for Keir Starmer. Listening back, it's an incredibly interesting discussion to revisit. The aim of Katy's piece was to communicate the internal problems that could arise from such a sweeping victory and, crucially, how Starmer might manage a historic cohort of backbenchers. One MP who knows about adjusting to life in government after a supermajority is Harriet Harman, former leader of the Labour party and a member of Tony Blair's first cabinet. (01:51) Reflections from the editor's chair The change in No. 10 Downing Street is, of course, not the only notable shake-up in Westminster this year. Fraser Nelson stepped down as editor of The Spectator in September after 15 years of wielding the editor's pen, with 784 issues to his name. We sat down with him on his final day in the office to reflect on his time at 22 Old Queen Street. (08:31) Do historians talk down to children? In June, Mary Wakefield dedicated her column to this very question. She wrote about her experience trying to find engaging and challenging history books for her 8-year-old and compared the dumbed-down, one-dimensional version of history portrayed in modern children's books with the classic Ladybird books of the 1960s. She joined the podcast to discuss this with Dominic Sandbrook, author of the Adventures in Time children's book series and host of The Rest is History podcast. (17:18) Are ultra-processed foods really so bad? On The Edition podcast, we enjoy a fiery debate, and none was more heated than our discussion on ultra-processed foods. This debate, between columnist Matthew Parris and Christoffer van Tulleken, associate professor at UCL and author of the bestselling book Ultra-Processed People, took place in May. It was sparked by Matthew's column on the myths surrounding ultra-processed foods—foods engineered to be hyper-palatable and typically containing preservatives, emulsifiers, sweeteners, artificial colours, flavours, and so on. Such additives are widely considered detrimental to our health. Matthew says we shouldn't be worried, but we'll let you decide. (29:10) By whose values should we judge the past? On the podcast, we showcase articles from across the magazine—from the front half to the life pages, to books and arts. One of the most intriguing books of the year was Joan Smith's Unfortunately, she was a nymphomaniac: A New History of Rome's Imperial Women. An eye-catching title that is ‘as thought-provoking as it is provocative', as Daisy Dunn wrote in October. Many popular historians are singled out for their analysis of women in ancient Rome, including Professor Dame Mary Beard. In the interest of granting a right of reply, we invited Mary onto the podcast to discuss the merit of judging history by today's standards. (49:40) And finally: the politics of the breakfast buffet We thought we would leave you with one of the most prescient discussions we had on the podcast this year: the politics of the hotel breakfast buffet. Is it ethical to pocket a sandwich at a hotel breakfast buffet? Laurie Graham explored that question in the magazine back in September. Specifically, she revealed the very British habit of swiping food from free breakfasts to save for lunch later in the day. Laurie joined us alongside Mark Jenkins, a former hotel manager in Torquay, whom listeners may remember from the Channel 4 documentary The Hotel. (01:04:04) Hosted by William Moore and Lara Prendergast.   Produced by Oscar Edmondson and Patrick Gibbons. 

Dr Chris van Tulleken shares stories from the making of his chart-topping podcast, Fed. In conversation with Leyla Kazim, at Hay Festival 2024.In Fed, Dr Chris van Tulleken, investigated the entangled web of forces that shape what ends up on our plates. And he focused his investigation around one foodstuff in particular. The most widely eaten meat on our planet, a staple of nearly every diet and a global food production phenomenon: the humble chicken, Chris dug into the history of our relationship with this extraordinary animal, to try to get to the truth of why we eat so much of it, and what that means for the birds, for us, and for the planet.In this lively conversation, recorded live at Hay festival 2024, Chris talks to Leyla Kazim about the hidden stories behind the globalised food networks of today. From industrial-scale farming, to food labelling, to ethical dilemmas, environmental quandaries, and the complexities of the world of fast food. Plus tales from the adventure that ran through the whole series: raising his own tiny flock of broiler chickens, in his back garden.

Dr Chris van Tulleken has been at the forefront of the campaign to change our food system and better regulate the sale of ultra-processed foods (UPF). This year he will be giving the Royal Institution Christmas lectures, Britain's most prestigious public science lectures, in which he'll be investigating how food has fundamentally shaped human evolution, the importance of our microbiome – as the extra ‘organ' we didn't know we had – and how we can all eat better in future, for the sake of our own health and the health of the planet. Nicola Davis sat down with Van Tulleken to discuss the lectures, the challenge of understanding the impact of UPFs on our health, and his top tip for Christmas dinner. Madeleine Finlay hears from them both in this Christmas special edition of Science Weekly. Help support our independent journalism at theguardian.com/sciencepod

Podcast Overview: The Truth About Ultra-Processed Foods In this episode, we explore the eye-opening insights from Chris van Tulleken's book, Ultra-Processed People, revealing the hidden dangers of ultra-processed foods (UPFs). UPFs, often found in sugary snacks, ready meals, and sodas, are loaded with artificial additives, preservatives, and unrecognizable ingredients. These foods are designed to be addictive, altering brain chemistry and driving overconsumption, as evidenced by studies like Kevin Hall's 2019 trial, which showed participants eating 500 extra calories daily on a UPF diet. The result? Weight gain, mood shifts, and chronic health issues like obesity and diabetes. UPFs' dominance stems from systemic factors, including marketing, affordability, and convenience, but their health impacts are far-reaching. From ingredients like high-fructose corn syrup to artificial flavors and emulsifiers, these foods are engineered for taste and shelf life at the expense of nutrition. Tune in to learn how to identify UPFs, understand their effects, and take simple steps toward healthier, whole-food alternatives. For extra support, follow us on Instagram @HormoneGenius and post your favorite clean products to claim a free grocery guide with the ingredients to be aware of! Thanks to our sponsor Fiat Institute! If the content you're hearing on this podcast has stirred something in your heart, and you feel called to be part of the change—to launch a mission in hormone health, wellness, and true women's health care—then this program is for you! The Fiat Institute certifies women as hormone coaches in a six-month program. You'll learn about gut health, inflammation, liver detox, cycle charting, cycle-syncing, root cause restoration, and the FiatWay Coaching Methodology. Plus, you'll find community in weekly calls, small-group breakouts, and the Fiat Sisterhood. Seats for January's cohort are limited! Schedule a discovery call with Jamie today! Be part of the movement to restore women's health. Fill out an inquiry form: www.honeybook.com/widget/fiat_inst…0194ff00292a19e2 OR Schedule a 15min 1:1 chat with her! See link: calendly.com/hormoneconsult/fir…chat?month=2024-12 To learn more you can visit www.fiatinstitute.com. Medical disclaimer: The information presented in this podcast is for informational purposes only and is not intended to be a substitute for actual medical advice from a doctor, or any medical professional.

In the news pod, Chris van Tulleken tells us what he's got planned for this years Royal Institution Christmas Lectures. Then we hear about the innovation to harness energy from radioactive carbon-14 atoms, and learn more about when humans and Neanderthals got to know each other. Then, we look skyward, where astronomers have described a series of mysterious near-Earth objects similar to the famous Oumuamua... Like this podcast? Please help us by supporting the Naked Scientists

In this episode, Jake and Damian share four impactful health hacks they've picked up from remarkable experts featured on High Performance. Drawing insights from guests like Dr. Peter Attia, Dr. Rangan Chatterjee, Ruari Fairbairns, and Dr. Chris van Tulleken, they explore how small lifestyle changes, such as reducing alcohol and eating immune-boosting foods, have improved their health and well-being, emphasising the value of long-term thinking and building habits through manageable steps.Listen in as Jake and Damian offer actionable tips you can start using today and uncover how minor adjustments in mindset and routines can create massive improvements on your health journey.Listen to the episodes mentioned:Dr Peter Attia: https://pod.fo/e/1e7be5Dr. Rangan Chatterjee: https://pod.fo/e/115f19Ruari Fairbairns: https://pod.fo/e/21baafDr. Chris van Tulleken: https://pod.fo/e/24d790

As Adrienne reflects on 6 years of the Power Hour, we are going to share some of our favourite episodes from the archives on Thursdays.Today we're sharing April 2023's episode all about Ultra-processed food, with guest Dr Chris van Tulleken. Since this episode Chris has been on a mission to get us discussing our diets and making positive healthy changes, and the phrase ultra-processed food has become common parlance!From the episode notes...Adrienne is joined by the wonderful Dr Chris van Tulleken to discuss his new book Ultra-Processed People. In the book Dr Chris discusses how we have entered a new 'age of eating' where most of our calories come from an entirely novel set of substances called Ultra-Processed Food, food which is industrially processed and designed and marketed to be addictive. But do we really know what it's doing to our bodies?Dr Chris van Tulleken is an infectious disease doctor at University College London Hospitals, and a Medical Research Council clinical research fellow at University College London in the Greg Towers lab, where he studies viral evolution and HIV. He has worked with aid organisations around the world over the past 10 years, including Doctors of the World. He also presents a range of programmes for the BBC including the double-Bafta winning Operation Ouch!. He is on Twitter @DoctorChrisVT Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Dr Chris van Tulleken shares stories from the making of his chart-topping podcast, Fed. In conversation with Leyla Kazim, at Hay Festival 2024.In Fed, Dr Chris van Tulleken, investigated the entangled web of forces that shape what ends up on our plates. And he focused his investigation around one foodstuff in particular. The most widely eaten meat on our planet, a staple of nearly every diet and a global food production phenomenon: the humble chicken, Chris dug into the history of our relationship with this extraordinary animal, to try to get to the truth of why we eat so much of it, and what that means for the birds, for us, and for the planet.In this lively conversation, recorded live at Hay festival 2024, Chris talks to Leyla Kazim about the hidden stories behind the globalised food networks of today. From industrial-scale farming, to food labelling, to ethical dilemmas, environmental quandaries, and the complexities of the world of fast food. Plus tales from the adventure that ran through the whole series: raising his own tiny flock of broiler chickens, in his back garden.

Today we're discussing ultra processed food. Ultra-processed foods (UPFs) are everywhere. Many of us eat them over and over again without really understanding the detrimental impact they're having on our health.  But why are these foods so addictive? Here to help us identify the ultra-processed parts of our diet are Professor Tim Spector and Dr. Chris van Tulleken.

Here in the UK, ultra-processed food makes up 60 percent of the average diet. The trouble is, says today's guest, UPFs have been shown to be the leading cause of early death in the world, ahead of tobacco. Feel Better Live More Bitesize is my weekly podcast for your mind, body, and heart. Each week I'll be featuring inspirational stories and practical tips from some of my former guests. Today's clip is from episode 414 of the podcast with Dr Chris van Tulleken. Chris is a practising infectious diseases doctor, one of the UK's leading science broadcasters, and author of the book Ultra-Processed People. Over consumption of ultra-processed foods may be the biggest public-health crisis of our time and, in this clip, he shares why he believes we eat stuff that isn't really food and why can't we stop. Thanks to our sponsor https://www.drinkag1.com/livemore Support the podcast and enjoy Ad-Free episodes. Try FREE for 7 days on Apple Podcasts https://apple.co/feelbetterlivemore. For other podcast platforms go to https://fblm.supercast.com. Show notes and the full podcast are available at drchatterjee.com/414 DISCLAIMER: The content in the podcast and on this webpage is not intended to constitute or be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis, or treatment. Always seek the advice of your doctor or other qualified health care provider with any questions you may have regarding a medical condition. Never disregard professional medical advice or delay in seeking it because of something you have heard on the podcast or on my website.

Purified and Born Again 1 Peter 1:22-2:3 Teacher: Blaine Dennison, Congregational Care Pastor at Oak Pointe Church Dr. Chris van Tulleken set out on a 30-day quest to discover what happens to the body on a diet of ultra-processed food (UPF). He found himself consuming more and more calories as time went on, yet he rarely felt full. One night he remarked, “I'm not enjoying it, but I can't stop.” The UPFs were causing him to want to eat increasingly more even while physically he was feeling worse. With a similar introspection, the Apostle Peter calls us to take care of our spiritual diet by consuming what is good and putting off the junk that stunts our growth. Is your heart feeling sluggish and insatiable? Do you crave what you know you shouldn't? Join us tomorrow morning for a spiritual checkup and learn how to get your heart in shape.

Are you ready to transform your health and embark on a journey toward a healthier, more purposeful life? Health, Vitality and Weight Loss Coach Sue Ellar shares her journey from struggling with weight and chronic ailments to thriving with energy through proper nutrition. Learn what natural, unprocessed foods can do for you and how to break free from misleading industry practices. Sue's mission is to empower the next generation with healthy eating habits however to achieve it, she needs your help with what corporations produce. That will only happen with changing the demand.   KEY TAKEAWAY ‘People are confused about what they can eat, what's healthy and what's not. So I can't set out on a mission to change the food industry, because let's face it, the only way we can change big corporations is by changing the demand.'   BOOK RECOMMENDATIONS* Ultra-Processed People by Chris van Tulleken - https://amzn.eu/d/iARYyM2 Focus on Why by Amy Rowlinson – https://amzn.eu/d/6W02HWu     ABOUT SUE Sue Ellar is on a mission to help women dramatically improve their health, energy, sleep, and release excess weight naturally. She harnesses the beautiful simplicity of evolutionary nutrition and behavioural change psychology to embed a more supportive, peaceful relationship with food. In just 90 days Sue's Eat Well Feel Great programme delivers significant health improvements such as reduced joint pain, improved gut health and sleep. Weight loss happens as a natural side effect - average 21 lbs. Sue's compassionate and doable approach helps ensure the changes last and clients are able to enjoy a life of food freedom, health and vitality for years to come.    CONNECT WITH SUE http://facebook.com/sueellar/ http://instagram.com/sue.ellar/ https://uk.linkedin.com/in/sueellar http://linktr.ee/sueellar    ABOUT AMY Amy is a Life Purpose Coach, Podcast Strategist, Global Podcaster, Speaker and Mastermind Host. Helping you to improve productivity, engagement and fulfilment in your everyday life and work. Prepare to banish overwhelm, underwhelm and frustration to live with clarity of purpose.   WORK WITH AMY If you're interested in how purpose can help you and your business, please book a free 30 min call via https://calendly.com/amyrowlinson/call   KEEP IN TOUCH WITH AMY Sign up for the weekly Friday Focus - https://www.amyrowlinson.com/subscribe-to-weekly-newsletter   CONNECT WITH AMY https://linktr.ee/AmyRowlinson   HOSTED BY: Amy Rowlinson   DISCLAIMER The views, thoughts and opinions expressed in this podcast belong solely to the host and guest speakers. Please conduct your own due diligence. *As an Amazon Associate, I earn from qualifying purchases.

Today's bonus guest is Dr Chris van Tulleken, he's the author of the bestselling book Ultra Processed People, an infectious diseases doctor and broadcaster. Now for anyone who's been listening to Big Fish for a while, you'll know that this book absolutely changed my life. It's an eye-opening exploration into ultra processed food and why we can't stop eating it. He looks at how this industrially processed food is designed and marketed to be addictive, why exercise and willpower can't save us and what UPF is really doing to our bodies and our health. I absolutely loved this conversation with Chris - you'll find it utterly fascinating.

Dr Chris van Tulleken wrestles with the dilemma of slaughter. Could he bring himself to dispatch an animal himself? Is he happy supporting an industry which kills animals in his name? And if not, what could he eat instead?Chris explores the rise of the alternative protein industry – plant-based meat alternatives, lab-grown meat, or most shocking of all for some, actual meat abstinence, Veganism.And it is time to revisit that initial question: what's influencing our choices when it comes to eating chicken, what impact is that having – and are we bothered?

Do YOU know what you're eating? Are you sure?Dr Chris van Tulleken is keen to make good food choices, and buy the best chicken possible for his dinner. High welfare, tasty, and good for the environment, ideally. But it's not as easy as that. How CAN he make good food choices if he has no idea what he's buying?Chris explores what we actually know about the food we buy, and to what extent we can trust what's on a label.He also uncovers the startling truth about two very different ways that we buy chicken - lifting the lid on why sometimes, even the most moral meat shoppers turn a blind eye...

The is the second instalment of a two-part discussion. We're living longer than ever before but we are also spending more years in poor health and some communities become more sick than others. In June 2024 science journalist Layal Liverpool and medical doctor Chris van Tulleken came to Intelligence Squared to reveal the underlying causes of our growing health crises. Drawing on the themes of their respective books Systemic: How Racism is Making Us Ill, and Ultra-Processed People, they uncover how structural problems and inequalities – from racism in medicine to processing in food – are making us increasingly and needlessly ill. We are sponsored by Indeed. Go to Indeed.com/IS for £100 sponsored credit. This is the second instalment of two-part discussion. If you'd like to become a Member and get access to all three parts immediately and all of our longer form interviews and Members-only content, just visit intelligencesquared.com/membership to find out more. For £4.99 per month you'll also receive: - Full-length and ad-free Intelligence Squared episodes, wherever you get your podcasts - Bonus Intelligence Squared podcasts, curated feeds and members exclusive series - 15% discount on livestreams and in-person tickets for all Intelligence Squared events - Our member-only newsletter The Monthly Read, sent straight to your inbox ... Or Subscribe on Apple for £4.99: - Full-length and ad-free Intelligence Squared podcasts - Bonus Intelligence Squared podcasts, curated feeds and members exclusive series ... Already a subscriber? Thank you for supporting our mission to foster honest debate and compelling conversations! Visit intelligencesquared.com to explore all your benefits including ad-free podcasts, exclusive bonus content and early access. ... Subscribe to our newsletter here to hear about our latest events, discounts and much more. https://www.intelligencesquared.com/newsletter-signup/ Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

The is the first instalment of a two-part discussion. We're living longer than ever before but we are also spending more years in poor health and some communities become more sick than others. In June 2024 science journalist Layal Liverpool and medical doctor Chris van Tulleken came to Intelligence Squared to reveal the underlying causes of our growing health crises. Drawing on the themes of their respective books Systemic: How Racism is Making Us Ill, and Ultra-Processed People, they uncover how structural problems and inequalities – from racism in medicine to processing in food – are making us increasingly and needlessly ill. We are sponsored by Indeed. Go to Indeed.com/IS for £100 sponsored credit. This is the first instalment of two-part discussion. If you'd like to become a Member and get access to all three parts immediately and all of our longer form interviews and Members-only content, just visit intelligencesquared.com/membership to find out more. For £4.99 per month you'll also receive: - Full-length and ad-free Intelligence Squared episodes, wherever you get your podcasts - Bonus Intelligence Squared podcasts, curated feeds and members exclusive series - 15% discount on livestreams and in-person tickets for all Intelligence Squared events - Our member-only newsletter The Monthly Read, sent straight to your inbox ... Or Subscribe on Apple for £4.99: - Full-length and ad-free Intelligence Squared podcasts - Bonus Intelligence Squared podcasts, curated feeds and members exclusive series ... Already a subscriber? Thank you for supporting our mission to foster honest debate and compelling conversations! Visit intelligencesquared.com to explore all your benefits including ad-free podcasts, exclusive bonus content and early access. ... Subscribe to our newsletter here to hear about our latest events, discounts and much more. https://www.intelligencesquared.com/newsletter-signup/ Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

We've heard about the potential problems around chicken welfare. But how does that square with their impact on the environment?Dr Chris van Tulleken finds out what it takes to produce the most eco-friendly chicken meat possible. And makes a devastating discovery. Welfare concerns, and environmental credentials, often pull in OPPOSITE directions. Does he want to eat the happiest birds, or the ones kindest to the planet?Halfway through his poultry quest, Chris remains massively conflicted: he loves chicken, but some of what he's discovered makes him question how much he eats it. Will he still be able to look at it the same way as he goes deeper down the rabbit hole? And more importantly, should he keep serving it up to the family?

We eat chicken. A LOT of it. We might love the taste, but what about how we're treating those birds?After witnessing first-hand the reality of indoor chicken farming - how most of the chicken we eat is raised - Dr Chris van Tulleken wants to know: are the birds happy enough, or is our method of rearing cheap chicken actually cruel?If so, what's the ‘happier' alternative – and do carnivores like Chris care enough to pay the price for that, or does a love of meat ultimately trump ethics?Chris battles with his conscience, and finds the answer hard to stomach.

So we started farming this bird called chicken, and it spread around the world. But what does it actually TAKE to feed us the amount of chicken we want to consume?100 years ago this was a scrawny, egg-laying bird, only good for a stew once her eggs ran out – no one ate chicken meat. Fast forward to today and it's the most consumed protein on the planet. How did we come to eat it in the first place, and what are the consequences of producing chicken meat on the vast, industrial scales we now consume it?Dr Chris van Tulleken uncovers the extraordinary accident of history that birthed a new industry, and changed the way we eat – and think about – meat forever.

Dr Chris van Tulleken is on a mission to find out what we're eating, why, and who or what might be influencing our decisions. And he's starting his quest to uncover food truths with the most eaten meat in the world, and one of the most numerous animals on our planet: chicken.He's recently been forced to confront a serious gap in his food knowledge - what happens before it gets to our plates - and has decided this, the world's most popular meat, is an ideal starting point.Chris' initial investigations reveal the vast scale of modern chicken consumption; and how a once revered jungle fowl was manipulated to become a modern food success story, a fast-growing heavy-breasted beast to feed the masses.Now, he's torn: is this a triumph of human ingenuity – or the creation of a monster?

Brian Cox and Robin Ince embrace failure in its many forms, with a frank look at the importance of making mistakes. They examine the flaws in Charles Darwin's theory of evolution with the anthropologist Alice Roberts, as she tells them no idea is totally watertight. And sometimes scientific error even leads to important discoveries – just ask the heart patients who took a pill that did nothing for their medical condition but did boost their libido and which we now know as Viagra. But other failures in the field of medicine have had more serious consequences, and Dr Chris van Tulleken questions why we're not better at drug development for the poorest parts of the world.New episodes will be released on Wednesdays. If you're in the UK, listen to the full series on BBC Sounds: bbc.in/3K3JzyFProducer: Marijke Peters Executive Producer: Alexandra FeachemEpisodes featured: Series 15: Science's Epic Fails Series 11: Serendipity Series 25: What Have We Learnt From Covid?

Why do we all eat stuff that isn't food and why can't we stop? In this episode, Dr Chris van Tulleken, author of Ultra-Processed People explains all. As well as being one of the UK's leading science broadcasters, Chris is a practising infectious diseases doctor in the NHS. He gained his medical degree at Oxford University and his PhD in molecular virology from University College London, where he is an associate professor. He works closely with the World Health Organization and UNICEF, and his research looks at how corporations affect human health. In this episode, Chris explores what may be the biggest public health crisis of our time: ultra-processed food, or UPF, for short. Many people these days, certainly most regular listeners to this podcast, will be aware of UPFs. But there's still a lot of confusion around what they really are. For Chris, it's simple: if it's wrapped in plastic and has at least one ingredient you wouldn't find in a home kitchen, it's a UPF. If it makes a health claim on the packet? Ironically, it's even more likely! A UPF is any food that's processed industrially and created for big-business profit, rather than to provide nutrients. And here in the UK, UPF makes up 60 percent of the average diet. The trouble is, says Chris, UPFs have been shown to be the leading cause of early death in the world, ahead of tobacco. Even if you remain at what is considered a healthy weight, consuming UPFs still leaves you vulnerable to things like Type 2 Diabetes, heart disease, dementia, anxiety, depression, inflammatory bowel disease, cancer and eating disorders. In this conversation, Chris provides a clear definition of the difference between processing and ultra-processing, and explains how our toxic food environment is designed to be addictive. We also discuss a whole range of different topics such as the need to see obesity as a condition and not an identity and the seemingly revolutionary idea that re-prioritising food shopping and cooking as a vital, enjoyable part of our day, could be a first step towards the societal change that's urgently needed. This podcast episode is not about shame or blame - it's about education and empowerment. Chris is a brilliant communicator who insists the prevalence and appeal of UPFs is not our fault. I thoroughly enjoyed my conversation with him - I hope you enjoy listening.Support the podcast and enjoy Ad-Free episodes. Try FREE for 7 days on Apple Podcasts https://apple.co/feelbetterlivemore. For other podcast platforms go to https://fblm.supercast.com.Find out more about my NEW Journal here https://drchatterjee.com/journalThanks to our sponsors:https://zoe.comhttps://calm.com/livemorehttps://drinkag1.com/livemoreShow notes https://drchatterjee.com/414DISCLAIMER: The content in the podcast and on this webpage is not intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis, or treatment. Always seek the advice of your doctor or qualified healthcare provider. Never disregard professional medical advice or delay in seeking it because of something you have heard on the podcast or on my website. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Doctor and journalist Chris van Tulleken wanted to know how ultra-processed foods affect us, so for a month he ate almost nothing but UPFs. His book Ultra-Processed People examines how the food we eat today is dramatically changing our bodies and minds. This episode was produced by Siona Peterous, edited by Matt Collette, fact-checked by Isabel Angell, engineered by TK, and hosted by Noel King. Transcript at vox.com/todayexplained Support Today, Explained by making a financial contribution to Vox! bit.ly/givepodcasts Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

You are what you eat, right? If so, then our guest has a message for us: we're “ultra-processed people.” In this episode, Abdul reflects on just how culturally-driven our food choices are and how big corporations use that to influence those choices and feed us food that's…barely food at all. Then he interviews Dr. Chris van Tulleken, a physician and health researcher, about his book “Ultra-Processed People.”