7/22/25: Cuomo Admits Why Zohran Won, AOC Flamed For Israel Vote, Tim Dillon Reveals JD Epstein Cope, MAHA Cane Sugar

25:53Are you guys hearing that? So according to this statement, what they are saying is that Ghislaine Maxwell went to trial, right? Obviously, she lost there. She was prosecuted for human trafficking victims specifically to Jeffrey Epstein. Many, including myself, said that the charges were tailored in such a way to only implicate her and Epstein to put her in jail for the rest of her life so we can all just move on from it. And that at no point was there ever an opportunity for some of the broader conspiracy to be able to come out. In this, what they are saying, though, is that Maxwell was never given that opportunity to actually come forward.

26:23I want to continue, though, and this is part of the reason why we should all be a little bit skeptical, is unfortunately with Ghislaine Maxwell, you know, she has a lot of incentive now at this point. and for us to be a little skeptical of what she has to say. Here's a statement from her attorney this morning. Quote, I can confirm that we are in discussions with the government and that Ghislaine will always testify truthfully. We are grateful to President Trump for his commitment to uncovering the truth in this case. She also says before, remember she was seeking a pardon, quote, he's the ultimate dealmaker if this is about Trump.

26:53I'm sure he'd agree that when the United States gives its word, it should keep it. With all the talk about who's being prosecuted and who isn't, it's especially unfair. Ghislaine Maxwell remains in prison based on a promise the U.S. government made and broke. What she's referring to, guys, is according to her, what's so unjust. Remember that non-prosecution agreement that Epstein entered into in 2007? That covered the immunity for Epstein and for Ghislaine Maxwell, an unindicted co-conspirator in the case. Her position is that that illegal non-prosecution agreement, according to the court, because it violated the victim's rights, then should have given her immunity for all time, and that the government broke its word by offering this sketchy deal to Epstein in the first place, just so we don't all think Ghislaine Maxwell is necessarily a hero.

27:38But here's the question. How much of this is real, and how much of it is controlled? Can we really, you know, trust? Because let's imagine this scenario. Maxwell comes and meets with the government. The government says, okay, let's make a deal. You know, let's, and a deal for what, though? And to what purpose? because at this point, I think, not just Trump, but a lot of other powerful people have a lot of incentive for Maxwell to say, I didn't know anything about anybody broader, powerful people. It was just me and Jeffrey. That actually is what you would want to say right now to get a sweetheart deal.

28:10No, from the deputy attorney general, from the Trump administration, if you start implicating all kinds of, quote, third-party individuals, then things get a little bit complicated. And then what the government can say is, look, we went to Ghislaine. We offered her a deal. She told us it was only her and Jeffrey. It's not a full-fledged, quote, investigation because it doesn't follow any of the money. It doesn't look at any of the intelligence connections. The things that I've detailed now on this show and on other shows now for weeks, specifically about Epstein, the sources of his wealth, Leslie Wexner, about Aelid Barak, Leon Black, what was going on with this 1.4 billion in suspicious activity reports coming in and out of Epstein-related accounts from four different financial institutions.

28:50So there is a high chance of a cover-up, actually, in the way that this is all being conducted, and possibly even on the way to a pardon. Because at this point, if you're Ghislaine and you're looking at the conduct of the Trump administration, you know, would it really behoove you to implicate a bunch of third-party individuals? Or would it be better for you at this point to say, actually, it was just me and Jeffrey. Everything else is just completely, you know, everything else is a, quote, conspiracy theory. My father was never a Mossad asset, even though we got a state funeral in Israel. And we can all just move on very carefully.

29:24So that's something very important to say. There's a second very interesting clip here from Tim Dillon, who has revealed now to Alex Jones that he recently had dinner last week with J.D. Vance, the vice president of the United States. and that the vice president told Tim Dillon that all of the, quote, thousands of hours of footage was just personal pornography for Jeffrey Epstein's personal use. And it didn't implicate anybody powerful. Here's what he had to say. The Trump administration had been heavily implicated. I'm not going to name names. And so, but you nailed it. When you brought up Netanyahu.

29:56So tell me, if you've got time here. I have to, we have all the time in the world. I just want to add, when Bondi said we have 10 ,000 hours of video, She said we have 10 ,000 hours of video. I had dinner last week with the vice president. He told me that that was commercial pornography. They do not have videos of any powerful person in a compromising position. That's the party line that they're going with. If that's the case, why would Pam Bondi call it evidence? Why would she say it's evidence? She's not an idiot. She's the attorney general. Why would she say she has files on her desk if none of these implicated anybody?

30:43It just feels like they're covering something for sure. So there you go. Now, according to Tim, who recently had dinner with the vice president, the vice president told him that actually it's just commercial footage and there's no footage of powerful individuals. Now, that's very interesting because that would actually presume that at the highest levels of the White House, they did review some of the, quote, Epstein files. That's something that the president and his team have denied, remember. They're saying it was just by the FBI and the DOJ. So at some level, at the highest levels of our political leadership, they did review this stuff.

31:16And they're saying, hey, don't worry about it. All the footage actually was just commercial pornography for his own personal use. It didn't implicate any higher level people. doesn't fit necessarily at all, right, with the fact that there were hidden cameras found in the Virgin Islands and the New York residents and at many of these other places. Perhaps, you know, it's not sexual material, but what if it's blackmail material involving business deals or involving intelligence operations? This is just what gets to the whole crux of the matter. According to Tim, he told the vice president, if you don't release it all, you're done and you're going to look like you're implicated in a cover-up.

31:47So these two things just look very, very sketchy, if you ask me. And perhaps there's some recognition there at the highest levels of the White House that they've actually are making a big mistake. But also at the same time, there is some very sketchy behavior in terms of the conduct of Republicans themselves, especially the congressional Republicans who are basically joining together to make sure there's not a single vote on the House floor about the Epstein files. So let's remember that right now Ro Khanna and Thomas Massey have a joint, I think it's a resolution or an amendment that would, if voted on, would force the release of the Epstein files from Congress and basically mandate the administration release any and all information that they currently have.

32:32Now, let's put this up there on the screen. As Theo Vaughn has pointed out, why can't we put Ro Khanna and Thomas Massey Bill for a vote up this week at Speaker Johnson, at J.D. Vance, J.D. Vance, of course, who appeared on Theo's show. Now, Speaker Johnson, when asked about this, says that he will not allow a vote on the House floor ahead of the forthcoming August recess, effectively shutting down any potential vote on the Epstein files going forward because he wants to trust the government. Here's what he had to say. Here's what I would say about the Epstein files. There is no daylight between the House Republicans, the House and the president on maximum transparency.

33:10He has said that he wants all the credible files related to Epstein to be released. He's asked the attorney general to request the grand jury files of the court. All of that is in process right now. My belief is we need the administration to have the space to do what it is doing. If further congressional action is necessary or appropriate, then we'll look at that. But I don't think we're at that point right now because we agree with the president. So no vote on this resolution? No, no. Let's look at that very, very carefully. So he says specifically that he will shut down any vote on the Epstein files because he wants to, quote, allow the administration the space to deal with.

33:47The space to deal with what? To release the files that you allegedly support? No. Or to not release all the files. Or to say that only it's the credible evidence or the stuff that is pertinent. And these are all the terms and the definitions of things that matter when you're not actually committed to releasing all the information that you literally said that you would do if you were elected president. And that's really what gets it all down to it. And more importantly, from this point forward, there's actually a piece of procedural news, which is totally crazy, is that right now the House of Representatives has effectively been shut down to make sure that there is no vote on the Epstein file.

34:23So let me kind of explain this. So what has happened is that they are not allowing any, quote, rules. They will not report a single rule this week for bills. They're shutting down the entire House floor for the week just so they don't allow a vote on the Epstein files to allow that bill and a vote for people to be able to come together and to vote specifically to release the files. That is the level to which the House Republicans have now moved to shut all this stuff down. That's crazy. So you have here the House Republicans coming together to protect the administration. You have the administration opening up these talks with Ghislaine Maxwell.

35:06We'll see what comes out of it. I mean, let's be honest. It looks pretty sketchy, and it looks in particular in the direction of if she were willing to say it didn't implicate anybody else. That's kind of where I would, if I were her, that's how I'd want my pardon, isn't it? She's going to spend 20 years in jail. Otherwise, you've got apparently the vice president telling Tim Dillon that they reviewed the footage and it's just all commercial pornography. It doesn't implicate anybody broader. But of course, they're ignoring all the financial documentation, all these other files and all these other things that they at the time said that a journalist should be willing to look into.

35:37Remember, whenever they were on the campaign trail or whenever they held previous office. And then you have the current pressure from the government right now going after institutions that have reported here about the Trump-Epstein connection. Let's put this one up there finally then on the screen from the Wall Street Journal. The White House has actually removed the Wall Street Journal from Scotland press pool as Trump is set to travel there over the Epstein report. So again, it's kind of complicated and we've talked about it a little bit here. The White House press pool is like a select small group of journalists that travels with the president.

36:13They go on Air Force One, and you kind of work together, and you send your reports to the rest of the press. And you're kind of the representative of the global press, not necessarily of your own paper. Well, what they've done here is they've actually removed the Wall Street Journal White House reporters, who had nothing to do with this story, from the press pool over the Epstein story. Now, I mean, they've done this type of stuff before with the Associated Press and the whole Gulf of Mexico thing. I think it's stupid. But it just goes to show the level of freak out from the Trump administration right now against the Journal.

36:43I know Crystal and Emily talked about this yesterday, but you've got this weird meeting between J.D. Vance and the Murdoch family two days before the Epstein story comes out. Remember, Trump himself said, Rupert said he would take care of it in his truth about the story around the letter that was eventually released. You've got all this Trump administration behavior now. You've got the fact that they filed for, what,$10 billion of defamation in court. I can't wait for that suit to go forward, by the way, because Trump said, I can't wait to get Rupert Murdoch under oath. I'm like, well, I can't wait to get Trump under oath about this story as well.

37:16I hope he fights it all the way to the end. I'm absolutely certain he'll win. Well, also, they should release the journal for journalistic purposes at this point, the bound book, which literally had the letter in it, show everybody what it is. But look, the handling on this, it continues to be incredibly strange, weird. The conduct of the US government right now just only points in the single of a coverup. You can deduce for reasons for yourselves. So with all that being said, let's turn now to Maha and my guest, Dr. Lane Norton, to talk about cane sugar Coke and the seed oils debate. This is Matt Rogers from Lost Culture East.

37:55That's with Matt Rogers and Bowen Yang. This is Bowen Yang from Lost Culture Results with Matt Rodgers and Bowen Yang. You know when people try on new food and suddenly it's like, wait. That's the reaction a lot of people are having when they first try Kewpie mayo. It's the one with the red cap and the little baby on the bottle. You've probably seen it in the grocery store before. And if you've ever just walked past it, some people would say that's a huge mistake. Because this mayo is different. Most mayonnaise uses whole eggs. Kewpie only uses egg yolks, which gives it this rich umami flavor.

38:26It's smoother, deeper, and almost buttery. Once people try it, they start putting it on everything. Egg sandwiches, fries, burgers. Some fans even swear by dipping pizza crust in it. And once you notice it, you start seeing it everywhere. Chefs use it. Restaurants use it. People who really care about flavor use it. Never tried it? Grab the bottle with the red cap next time you're at the store. Put it on just about anything. Then you'll understand. Kupi, the original Japanese mayonnaise. Shortly after I enrolled at Rasmussen, I was diagnosed with breast cancer. It was like a bomb had just been dropped in my life.

39:01I reached out to Rasmussen. They immediately were like, Rosa, take what time you need. You can come back when you're ready. We are cancer-free today, and I'm just so grateful for Rasmussen, for all of their support throughout my journey, and for my own village. Rasmussen University. Find your seat and start now at rasmussen.edu. Discover a spectacular island destination. with crystal blue seas, endless sunshine, and the cool Bahamian breeze. Bahamar, located in Nassau, Bahamas, offers your choice of three luxury hotels, the richly refined Rosewood, the playfully hip SLS, and the stylishly modern Grand Hyatt.

39:40With over 45 restaurants, bars, and lounges, Bahamar serves up delicious dining from world-renowned chefs like Daniel Bouloud and Marcus Samuelson, nightlife venues like the new Jean Batiste Jazz Club, and the Caribbean's most luxurious casino. At Baja Mar, you'll find every pleasure under the sun and one-of-a-kind experiences for the entire family, like Baja Bay, our 15-acre lush tropical water park, interactive wildlife experiences, including our daily flamingo parade, world-class golf, tennis, spa, and so much more. Visit BajaMar.com today and discover a vacation destination where memories are made for a lifetime.

40:18Baja Mar, life spectacular. killer. Very excited now to be joined by my friend, Dr. Lane Norton. He is, and I'm going to get his full bio correct, PhD in nutritional science, co-founder of the Carbon Diet Coach nutrition coaching app, a carbon, by the way, product that I use. And Lane, you and I go way back, but for our purposes here, what I wanted to have you on to the show for is to break down all of this discussion that's bubbling up right now to the highest levels of the U.S. government around seed oil. So more recently, and cane sugar Coke as well. So let's put this up here on the screen.

40:53This is the latest, quote, Maha victory from Secretary of Health and Human Services, Secretary Kennedy, endorsing here Steak and Shake, who's saying, start on August 1st, Steak and Shake will offer Coca-Cola with real cane sugar in glass bottles. America deserves the best. They're branding themselves, Make America Healthy Again, RFK Jr.'s signature slogan. They previously, this fast food chain, had replaced, quote, seed oils with beef tallow fries, presenting themselves as a healthier option. Now, since you are a PhD in nutrition science and you've given hours of content, you've reviewed all of the data, I just want you to break down at a nutritional science level whether this is a, quote, healthier option for people to be drinking cane sugar Coke as opposed to high fructose cone syrup Coke, having fries that are cooked in beef tallow versus having fries that are cooked in seed oils.

41:43so uh you made a good point which is is it healthy compared to because that's really what we want to know and um first off i want to say that i'm glad that people in u.s government are taking an interest in health and nutrition and promoting health promoting behaviors unfortunately i think people's personal biases are really getting in the way here and this is something I think with RFK is going on is known as a naturalistic fallacy, which is if something occurs in nature, it must be better for us. And in some cases, that's true. But in some cases, we have plenty of man-made things. Take whey protein, for example, which is an ultra-processed food, but has been shown to reduce levels of inflammation, improve glucose control, improve, I even think, levels of liver fat, and basically metabolic health.

42:35So I think we got to be careful with lumping things into big categories. Now, when it comes to replacing high fructose corn syrup sweetened beverages with cane sugar, again, the only reason I can think that people would think this is healthier is because cane sugar is natural. Biochemically, there is very little difference between cane sugar and high corn syrup. Cane sugar is sucrose and sucrose is 50 % is a disaccharide, which is a glucose molecule linked to a fructose molecule. So 50-50. High fructose corn syrup is 55 % fructose and 45 % glucose. So if you're telling me that a 5 % difference in fructose content is somehow going to change our nation's health, I would say that you're basically putting your energy into stuff that is not going to make a darn bit of difference.

43:30And I'm looking at right now, dozens of random randomized control trials in humans, where when they substitute high fructose corn syrup in a one to one ratio with other sugars, there's zero outcomes that are different in terms of body weight, body fat, liver fat, metabolic health, insulin resistance, because it's still sugar. And even if you want to go down that road, I mean, people make a big deal out of sugar, but the reality is our sugar intake has actually declined over the last 20 years while obesity has continued to rise. And when you look at isocaloric, so when I say isocaloric, I mean in feeding trials when they control total calories, but they substitute in other forms of carbohydrate for sugar.

44:21Again, you don't really see a difference in metabolic health outcomes or body weight or body fat. And there was even one randomized control trial that was very well controlled. They provided all the food to participants and they looked at over 100 grams of sugar intake per day versus about 10. And same total calories, protein, carbohydrate, fat intake was still the same. And they found that both groups lost basically the exact same amount of body fat and all their blood markers improved in both groups. Now, I'm not saying that eating sugar or high fructose corn syrup is a good idea. Right. Because people, it is not satiating and people over consume it.

45:03And so, you know, if you're going to eat a lot of sugar, it's not like people drink a Coke and they go, well, that was 40 grams of carbohydrates. So I'm going to skip pasta tonight. No, they just take it in on top of whatever else they're eating. So I think the real damaging messaging here is that somehow, because you've substituted in cane sugar, you haven't reduced overall calories, that this is healthier. It's not. There is no evidence this is going to make an actual difference for people. And I think the uncomfortable truth, and I default to something called Occam's razor, which basically the lay interpretation is when all things are equal, the simplest answer is usually true.

45:43The average calorie intake in the United States of America is 3 ,540 per day, and the average physical activity is less than 20 minutes per day, and that is why we have a health crisis, and people don't want to deal with that uncomfortable truth and the responsibility and accountability that comes along with it. Right, and I think that's such an important point. And Lane, every time I try to bring attention to this, and to be clear, I agree with the message, Make America Healthy, again. I think it's great, but I'm told very often that cane sugar Coke is better than drinking Diet Coke and that it's not about the calories, Sagar.

46:18It's all about the ingredients. And so I would love for you to basically get into that because they are rejecting not only a message or a theory of thermodynamics, not the law of thermodynamics, not a theory about calories in and calories out. They're accepting a framework in which the, quote, chemicals, the pesticides, the ingredients are themselves responsible for the health crisis that we find ourselves in America and not the, what is it that you said is the 3 ,400 calories per day that the average American intake? 3 ,500 plus, yeah. Okay, I would love for, please respond to that argument. Why, you know, in their framework, cane sugar Coke is better than Diet Coke.

47:00then they simply have not read the human randomized control trials. I mean, here's the argument against diet soda. Well, these compounds in it are carcinogenic. No, no, they're not. These are some of the most studied compounds in the history of mankind. Can you find rodent studies where they feed 10 ,000 times the dose of what you could ever get and they see weird things happen? Yeah. Yeah, well, try feeding 10 ,000 times the dose of anything and see if weird things happen. Yeah, I'm not surprised that weird stuff happens. And the question is, I mean, I do this on my videos all the time. I'm like, if only we had human randomized control trials where they look, oh, wait, we do.

47:42So if we look at if they tell people to drink diet soda in place of regular soda, what happens? And very consistently in the research literature, people lose significant amounts of body weight. There was actually a very recent 52-week randomized control trial where they had people either drink soda or diet soda or water, I actually believe. And what they found was I think on average people lost about 6.5 kilograms, okay? So like 14 pounds in freedom units. just by subbing in diet soda. And they actually lost a little bit more than the group that drank water. It wasn't a big difference, but it was a difference.

48:28Now, I'm not saying if you like drinking water, you don't have to drink diet soda. That's not what I'm saying. And I'm not saying that diet soda has some sort of magical fat burner in it that makes it better than water. But people who are used to drinking soda, if you replace that with either water or diet soda, what that says to me is the people drinking water probably were seeking out a sweet taste somewhere else because they weren't getting it from that, whereas the group that was drinking diet soda, they felt more satiated because they satisfied that sweet taste. And then if we look in the meta-analyses, we basically see that diet soda, there was one looking at a glycemic load because some of these people will say, well, diet sodas release insulin and et cetera, et cetera.

49:08No, they don't. They don't. In fact, the conclusion of a recent meta-analysis of dozens of human randomized control trials, basically you said that diet soda basically had the same effects as water okay and we do see because people lose weight not because of anything magic but people's uh hba1c goes down which is a marker for um insulin sensitivity and then like even going to the you brought up the seed oils thing too and i do want to touch on that oh we're gonna get to that don't worry yeah yeah oh okay okay well yeah i mean when you're looking at the diet soda stuff people say it's carcinogenic It's not.

49:43Over 80 % of the research studies say that it's not carcinogenic. And the 10 % that say maybe, and the other 10 % that say like, yes, it's always either weak epidemiology association data, or it's in animal studies giving super high doses. And I'm even thinking about one epidemiology study from Spain. It was 100 ,000 people. Got a lot of press about five years ago. And this is where the news will report certain headlines. And either they don't understand science, they don't read the full paper, or they just don't care and they just want to get people scared. So this study showed that at no intake of aspartame, that was the reference group.

50:28Compared to the reference group, the group consuming a low or moderate amount of aspartame had a relative risk increase of just under 20 % for cancer. Now, when I say relative risk increase, I don't mean you go from a 5 % absolute risk to a 25%. Relative risk increase means you go from 5 % to 6 % because 20 % of 5 % is 1%. So I just want to frame that appropriately for people because they don't understand relative risk either. so a 20 relative risk increase but what about why didn't they bring up the group that was the high group like the high intakes of aspartame because the risk actually went down compared to the moderate or low group now please i want anybody out there to let me know what is carcinogenic at a low dose but not carcinogenic at a high dose somebody please explain that to me and so again these weak epidemiology studies, I'm sorry, I just don't buy them, and they're not supported by any real hard human data.

51:29This is very important. Now let's get to the seed oils thing. Again, I have watched this stuff run like a craze across the internet to the point where I have people in my own life who are explicitly going out of their way to, quote, avoid seed oils. I can live with that if it's an internet phenomenon, but now I'm watching the United States government, and I want to be clear. It's not that I'm against making people healthy, using government policy or whatever to try and encourage it. What I'm concerned about in this case is the Secretary of Health and Human Services saying this is a healthy meal, drinking a cane sugar Coke, beef tallow fries, and a cheeseburger.

52:01Or for example, lately, there is a new effort by the government, Lane, to get Lay's chips to replace seed oils with avocado oil. And that's the thing, is that it's a presumption that the seed oils and not the caloric density of this highly palatable chip itself that people are eating is the problem. I don't want, it's like the fat-free craze of the 1990s, right? Where people go to the grocery store and they say, oh, it's fat-free. And that's why it's, quote, healthy. Well, that created a permission structure for people to continue to up their caloric dose. And I say this because I'm susceptible to it.

52:36Until I started looking at your content and others, I'm the person buying and reading the influencers and all this other stuff while struggling with my weight for over 20 years, right? And so you've looked at the data on the seed oils. Let's go and put this up there on the screen. And you look specifically at the data, replacing seed oils with canola and – I'll let you read out the rest of these – with saturated fat. Tell us in detail here what the data shows us about replacing seed oils with saturated fat. Yeah, so this is what's really important is if you're talking about adding something into the diet or removing something from the diet, the question – one of my favorite political commentators was Thomas Sowell.

53:16And I always liked one of the things he said is if somebody is making a claim, your first question should be compared to what? So, okay, seed oils are bad. Compared to what? Because I agree. Like one of the biggest sources of added calories over the last few decades is added oils. In that way, seed oils have contributed to the obesity crisis because they're calorically dense. And they're in a lot of ultra-processed foods. And people cut them out and they say, well, I feel better. Well, you stopped eating junk food. It wasn't the seed oils. You lost weight. It wasn't the fact that you were not eating seed oils.

53:53It was the fact that you stopped eating so many damn calories. Now, with the seed oil data specifically, if we replace in a one-to-one ratio with saturated fat, so at worst for seed oils, you get a neutral effect on metabolic health like liver fat, insulin sensitivity. You get inflammation. you get a neutral effect at worst. And a lot of studies show that replacing saturated fat with polyunsaturated fats from seed oils like canola oil improve inflammation, reduce liver fat, they improve insulin sensitivity, they improve endothelial function. And then if we look at the long-term data, now this is cohort data, which is a form of epidemiology, but the reality is you can't do 30-year nutrition randomized control trials.

54:45It's just impossible to do. Nobody is going to stick to a diet for that long. Unfortunately, as I know as a coach, people just have really poor adherence. But if we look at the cohort data, if we look at people who consume more seed oils versus people who consume more saturated fat, what do we see when it comes to mortality, heart disease, and cancer? And what we see very consistently in the literature is people who consume seed oils or plant oils in place of saturated fat live longer. They have lower rates of cardiovascular disease. And some studies show lower rates of cancer and some studies don't.

55:28So I'm not sure if that's a real effect. But certainly for heart disease and mortality, and again, this is one of those things. when the anti-seed oil people get in debates with me, the best studies they can cite are studies that so reducing saturated fat does not improve health outcomes. And I'm like, oh, wait, wait, wait. Didn't we just move the goalpost though? Because you're saying seed oils are bad. Now you're just saying, well, saturated fat isn't bad. But if you're going to argue that seed oils are bad, if you are going to make that argument, then you have to argue that saturated fat is bad for you because at every metric, it is either a neutral or worse effect by consuming more saturated fat in place of Cetols.

56:11So this idea that you're going to put beef tallow into fries, and that's going to make people healthier. It's absolute lunacy. It's ridiculous. And I actually got invited to go on this Maha trip to Congress last year, and I declined it. And the reason I declined it was because I knew this was going to happen. What was going to happen was they were going to banned some random ingredients in food. Artificial food. Yeah. Food die. Yeah. And nobody was going to actually want to deal with the reality, which is people eat too much and move too little, because that is a very, very difficult problem to solve because it is multifaceted.

56:49It is, it involves socioeconomic things. It involves the way our whole society is set up. And Hey, to be fair, I don't know what the answer is. I don't know what the answer is, but I think coddling people and lying to them and telling them, well, your fries, your ultra processed sources of refined sugar and fat are now fried in beef tallow rather than seed oils. Okay. Now steak and shake is healthy. Like get out of here. Like it is an absolute freaking, it is a distraction from the real problem. And quite frankly, it, you can tell it makes me sick that this is getting so much play because it is literally going to do absolutely nothing other than make a few politicians feel good about themselves, pat themselves on the back and steak and shakes going to get some free press.

57:44That's what actually what I'm worried about is that steak and shit people, there are a lot of good meaning people who trusted RFK Jr. or trust Ma or whatever, but they're going to go and they're going to get that Coke and they're going to be like, this is healthier, babe. I'm telling you, you know, they said, make America healthy. It's been endorsed by the Senate secretary for health and human services. People don't have all the time in the world to read your work or to listen to your videos or watch this interview. They put their trust in this person, the president appointed him and he's using the full force right now, the U S government to basically prop the stuff up.

58:13And I think that's the last thing I want to kind of get into you with about what the evidence points us in the direction. Because again, and it's not just about cancer. The core claim is that the art of, I remember Fruit Loops. RFK, I think he was on our show and he was talking about Fruit Loops. He's like, in Canada, they don't have food dye, right? And I checked the macros and actually they're basically the same. The macros in terms of the sugar for Fruit Loops. So like the core proposition being put forward is that the problem with American Fruit Loops is the fact that there's food dye in it, as opposed to all of this sugar, right?

58:46And that you're feeding this to your child for breakfast and whether that is a healthy choice or not. So then it gives companies the easiest out in the world of like, oh sure, we'll put it in avocado oil, whatever. Yeah, maybe our marginal cost will go up, but then people will actually buy more of it because they think it's healthy, as opposed to what you just talked about here. It's all about this calories. And that's really the final thing I'd like for you to get into is I was talking with Andrew Huberman, our mutual friend, about how GLP-1 drugs kind of did prove the proposition of calories in, calories out, right?

59:21It's like people take the GLP-1 drug, Ozempic is what I'm referring to for the lay person, and they stopped eating more. They not only lost weight, they got health. All their biomarkers are trending in a much better direction, especially for people who are obese. It didn't have anything to do with pesticide. But I know a lot of people on Ozempic, they eat a ton of junk food. I went to Japan, one of the healthiest countries in the world. Do you know how much deep fried food that they eat in seed oil? They're all skinny. They look pretty good and they live a long time. And a lot doesn't seem to have anything to do with seed oil.

59:51It has a lot to do with caloric intake. So that's the final thing I'd like to tee you up on. Yeah, I mean, it's the, I'm not saying that calories are the only thing that matter. I want to be very clear. There are some other things that matter. but in terms of the big rocks that you can pick up to put your focus into it's it's the biggest thing that matters for at least for metabolic health and losing weight I mean you want to talk about something being toxic too many calories are toxic because at a certain point you exceed you only really have a few places to dispose of excess glucose and lipid And that is in liver can store a little bit of glycogen and fat muscle can store some glycogen and fat.

1:00:37But your big biggest depot is your adipose tissue. But your adipocytes, your fat cells can only reach a certain size, about 100 microns in diameter a piece before they become essentially non viable. Where you now you've run out of places to put it into and now it starts backing up into the bloodstream. And that's why you have elevated blood glucose, blood lipids in people who have type 2 diabetes and compromised insulin sensitivity. And so what are you going to do? You've got to make space somewhere where your body can make more fat cells. But it never does it at a rate that can catch up to the excess lipid and glucose that's in the bloodstream.

1:01:15And so if you just exercise, just exercise. Okay, you don't even have to lose weight. But 16 weeks of resistance training in obese men with type 2 diabetes was shown to improve insulin sensitivity by 45%. Wow. Okay? Yeah. We saw in some of our – in the lab I was in in graduate school, lab of Don Lehman at University of Illinois, he was doing a human randomized control trial in women and basically saw people's blood markers when they lost just like 10, 15 pounds. they saw them start to resolve almost immediately. You don't need to do a ton of exercise or lose a ton of weight to begin to get metabolically healthy.

1:02:00It will happen relatively quickly. That is your body's natural state. And honestly, it takes pushing it past a really ridiculous point to get to where we are. But that's where we are. Because you can, not only in the 1950s, we had ultra processed foods. We had cakes, cookies, But you had to go to the bakery or you had to make it yourself. Now, you don't even have to wait. You can just get on DoorDash, have somebody pick it up from the circle, okay, and bring it to your house. So these are the problems we're dealing with. And you mentioned it. For 50 years, fat loss research focused on metabolism.

1:02:41How do we speed people's metabolism up? And people who are obese, well, they got to have slow metabolisms. or people with type 2 diabetes, they got to have slow metabolisms. Not only does the research not support that, people with type 2 diabetes or people who are obese have, if anything, faster metabolisms than people who are lean when they actually put them in a metabolic chamber and measure them. And oh, if calories don't matter, isn't it interesting when we put people in metabolic ward trials where they're basically in food jail and they have to eat what the researchers give them, they all lose weight.

1:03:16wow, magic, somehow, you know, and then people will say, well, you know, you can eat so low that your metabolism slows down and all this. Yeah. All these concentration camp photos of people who were obese because they didn't eat enough. Like, come on, get out of here. This is all just an excuse for people to shirk personal responsibility because calories in, calories out. The thing people don't like about it is the, the inherent truth that there is personal responsibility in this. And the GLP-1 memetics, as you mentioned, for 50 years, we focused on metabolism. And then for the last 10 years, we focused on appetite.

1:03:55And what happened? I mean, the research data that's coming out now basically says these GLP-1s are stopping obesity in its tracks and reversing it. And in fact, food companies are actually really worried because people are consuming less calories now. So these GLP ones, they don't increase metabolic rate. They don't do anything special. Well, they do something special other than they are the most powerful appetite suppressants known to man. And if we look at the difference between obese people and lean people, it is not on the metabolism side. It is on the appetite side. People who are obese or obese prone, they tend to get more of a reward from food.

1:04:42They tend to not have the same sensitivity to satiety signals as lean people. And they also tend to dissipate less energy through spontaneous movement compared to lean people. So just to explain what that is briefly, you have like a certain amount of movement you do without even thinking about it, like fidgeting, like what I'm doing with my hands right now, this would be considered non-exercise activity, thermogenesis, postural movement. Those little bitty movements actually add up quite a bit over the course of a day. And we have seen very clear research going all the way back to the early 90s showing that people who are obese resistant phenotype, essentially, that if they overeat, they actually tend to just spontaneously without realizing it or intentionally doing it, they spontaneously increase their physical activity to compensate for it.

1:05:34Whereas people who are obese prone don't tend to do that. Got it. Lane, this is so, so helpful. Last word from you. Where can people find your new podcast and all of your work? So you can find me as BioLane on all social media platforms. My website's BioLane.com. And my new podcast is the Dr. Lane Norton podcast. I hope you guys will go check it out. If you want no BS, straight shooting truth, I give it to it straight without much frills. He certainly does, and that's why he is the GOAT of all of them. Thank you very much, sir, for joining us. We appreciate you, man. That's right, and he's ripped.

1:06:06Thanks, buddy. Ripped with no steroids, no drugs, all natural, the hard way, and he actually tells people how to do it. It's not easy to say, it's not easy to do it, but you at least show us the way that it can be done. Thank you very much, sir. We appreciate you. Thanks, buddy. Thank you guys so much for watching. We appreciate you. We will have a great show for everybody tomorrow with CounterPoints, and then we'll see you all then.

1:06:40Some people use ChatGPT to answer questions. Others use it to get real work done. With ChatGPT work, you bring the goal, plus real inputs like briefs, notes, files, feedback, data, and project plans. It can help turn them into an analysis, tracker, deck outline, prototype, or workflow you can review and keep shaping. You stay in control, giving direction and choosing the final output. Put ChatGPT to work on your most ambitious ideas and projects. Get started at ChatGPT.com by selecting work mode. Available on Plus and Pro plans. My name is Arnold Bogarty, and prior to me, enrolled in Rasmussen to become a nurse.

1:07:15I spent 16 years in the military, 12 in Special Forces, as an Army Green Beret, and I was recommended to Rasmussen by a former student. She said she loved the culture. It was a family atmosphere. I went to visit the campus. The facilities were amazing. I knew before I left that that was the school that I was going to attend. Rasmussen University. Are you ready to be your own hero online and on campus? Learn more at rasmussen.edu. I love the little everyday moments with my dog, especially treat time. But dental care? Not always so fun. Until we found Greeny's Dental Treats. These are more than just tasty.

1:07:52They're vet recommended and designed to support the four areas vets check the most. Plaque, tartar, gums, and breath. Their unique texture cleans down to the gum line and supports cleaner teeth after 28 days when fed daily. It's a simple daily habit that supports their health and gives us another moment to enjoy together. Greenies make health a treat. Shop now at greenies.com. This is an iHeart Podcast. Guaranteed human.