This is My Invitation to Peace, Empathy, and Scientific Collaboration in Nutrition and Human Healing in Nutrition Science. Advocating plant-based diets is admirable, but defaming or shaming respected doctors and scientists with different perspectives undermines scientific integrity. Here’s my caring and independent perspective.
Here’s Why I Feel Sorry About Shamed Doctors, Scientists, and Thought Leaders for Ideology
The conversation around what we eat has rarely been calm. Every decade brings new research, new recommendations, and new ideologies. Nutrition science turned into a battleground of moral superiority.
For example, the debate surrounding the EAT-Lancet reports, both the original 2019 version and the upcoming 2025 update, has evolved into more than a discussion about nutrition.
It has become a social movement that risks losing the essence of scientific dialogue: respect for evidence and for those who dedicate their lives to producing it. I feel very sorry for the affected medical doctors, distinguished scientists, and caring thought leaders in the health sector.
I write this as someone who has lived on both sides of the dietary spectrum. In my younger years, I adopted a vegan lifestyle with conviction and curiosity.
Later, a medically supervised return to animal-based ketogenic nutrition helped me recover from chronic metabolic challenges.
That experience reshaped my perspective. I no longer view dietary choices as moral hierarchies but as complex personal systems, each shaped by biology, culture, anthropology, and context.
Today, what concerns me most is not which food philosophy prevails but how scientists and doctors are treated when they express evidence-based dissent.
The release of a new report, “Meat vs EAT-Lancet: The Dynamics of an Industry-Orchestrated Online Backlash,” published by the Changing Markets Foundation in September 2025 and now circulating widely on social media, has amplified that concern.
My primary concern is the integrity and reputation of the professionals named, especially given the absence of clear evidence against them.
The Report That Sparked a Storm
The Changing Markets Foundation describes its 68-page report as an exposé of a “tightly coordinated network” of scientists, doctors, and health influencers accused of amplifying pro-meat narratives to undermine the original EAT-Lancet findings.
The report claims that hashtags such as #Yes2Meat and #ClimateFoodFacts were promoted by individuals with industry connections and coordinated communication strategies.
Among those named — many of whom I have followed for years — are respected professionals in nutrition and medicine: Dr. Georgia Ede, Dr. Jason Fung, Professor Frédéric Leroy, Dr. Frank Mitloehner, Dr. Nina Teicholz, Dr Zoe Harcombe, Professor Tim Noakes, Dr Shawn Baker, Dr. Ken Berry, and our Tasmanian physician, Dr Gary Fettke, among others.
Here is the list of accused doctors, scientists, or thought leaders from the report used countless times on X tweets. There is no scientific explanation, apart from the mention of the number of tweets and impressions, of how these people ended up on this shame list. I don’t know all of them, but at least I know 10 of them through X and academic journals or books.
As far as I know, these people I follow on X have no apparent connection with any association, as I have been following their research from peer-reviewed journals, their websites, or social media platforms.
They are labeled “mis-influencers,” a term defined in the report’s glossary as “individuals or entities actively spreading or amplifying mis- or disinformation within digital spaces to influence wider narratives and opinions.”
According to the report, these figures participated in an online backlash that reached millions of people in the months surrounding the 2019 launch of EAT-Lancet’s “planetary health diet.”
It further alleges that public relations agencies such as Red Flag and organisations like the Animal Agriculture Alliance and the Meat Institute coordinated messaging efforts, potentially on behalf of the meat industry.
The evidence cited includes social-media data, Freedom of Information documents, and leaked materials said to reveal attempts to pre-emptively discredit the EAT-Lancet findings.
Such allegations are serious and deserve scrutiny. Yet when a report publicly names professionals with long-standing academic or clinical reputations, especially those who have helped millions through research and education, the discussion requires exceptional care.
For instance, I have not seen a single post from Dr. Jason Fung promoting the carnivore diet. His public work centers on fasting, insulin regulation, and nutritional ketosis, topics I also study closely and have written multiple books about.
In his best-selling books like Obesity Code or Cancer Code, Dr fung encourages whole foods, healthy fats such as those from avocados and olives, and an abundance of vegetables over processed products.
Questioning or defaming such a respected specialist physician and public figure, who has guided thousands of people toward metabolic recovery, is both unfair and ethically concerning.
Consider also Dr. Nina Teicholz, ranked as #2 on the above shaming list, author of the NYT bestselling book The Big Fat Surprise, who spent years uncovering how flawed science and policy led to the demonization of dietary fat. Her contributions to science and society are beyond reproach, and she does not deserve to be on any shaming list.
Her research questions long-held assumptions about what truly causes metabolic disease and encourages open scientific debate rather than dogma. Far from promoting any diet cult, Dr Teicholz’s message is simple: nutrition science must be transparent, rigorous, and self-correcting.
Public Debate or Public Shaming?
The Changing Markets Foundation’s investigation raises valid questions about transparency, funding, and communication ethics.
However, the social media reaction to its release quickly shifted from curiosity to outrage.
Within hours and days, excerpts from the report appeared on X (formerly Twitter) with captions accusing several of the named doctors of being “industry puppets” or “anti-science influencers.”
Their names circulated in viral threads stripped of context, fueling mockery and hostility. That is the moment when public accountability turns into public shaming.
Many of the individuals listed, particularly Dr. Georgia Ede, a Harvard-trained nutritional psychiatrist known for her outstanding research on ketogenic interventions for mental health, published in Nature, Frontiers, and other peer-reviewed journals, has publicly stated that they have no financial ties to the meat industry.
In her detailed response on X on October 3, 2025, Dr Ede explained that her critiques of EAT-Lancet arose from independent clinical work and peer-reviewed research, not from corporate sponsorship.
Her record includes one of the earliest inpatient studies on ketogenic therapy for psychiatric conditions (2022), a contribution that advanced the field of nutritional psychiatry.
Others, such as Professor Frédéric Leroy, a food scientist studying food systems and ethics, have similar records of independent research and public education. They publish scientific work, speak at conferences, and engage directly with their audiences.
While their views may challenge mainstream dietary guidance, none have been proven to act as paid lobbyists for any industry.
Critique is the foundation of science; character assassination is its opposite.
When Transparency Becomes a Weapon
Transparency is essential. Every scientist or clinician communicating with the public should disclose potential conflicts of interest. But transparency should illuminate the truth, not be weaponized to imply guilt by association.
The Changing Markets Foundation argues that coordinated communication campaigns blur the line between personal opinion and industry messaging. That is a fair point worthy of discussion.
Yet, without concrete financial evidence, naming professionals as “mis-influencers” risks eroding trust in science itself. When legitimate skepticism is automatically framed as misinformation, independent thought becomes collateral damage.
In the social-media ecosystem, nuance fades rapidly. Once a name appears on a “shame list,” few readers examine the underlying report.
The reputational harm is instant; the correction, if it ever comes, is rarely seen. This is particularly troubling in health sciences, where researchers already navigate polarized audiences that interpret every dietary statement as a moral declaration rather than a scientific one.
Empathy Beyond Ideology
I understand the passion driving plant-based movements. The ethical argument for animal welfare is profound, and the environmental case for reducing industrial meat production is strong.
I also understand the biological and psychological realities of those who thrive on higher-protein, ketogenic, or animal-inclusive diets. Both perspectives deserve empathy and respect.
Empathy disappears when advocacy turns adversarial. When veganism becomes a moral weapon or carnivory a symbol of rebellion, dialogue stops.
Scientists who study either approach are often caught in the crossfire of ideological allegiance. When evidence gives way to identity, progress comes to a halt.
Our shared challenge is to prevent nutrition science from collapsing into a culture war, where methodology is overshadowed by ideology.
The Bigger Picture: Science, Trust, and Civility
The EAT-Lancet initiative, launched in 2019, remains one of the most ambitious efforts to align global nutrition with planetary sustainability.
Its recommendations — to double fruit and vegetable intake and reduce red-meat consumption by half — were built on ecological models and health-outcome projections. These aims, though admirable, inevitably face cultural, economic, and regional limitations.
The truth is, we are all different. Across the world, millions of people eat both plant and animal foods for health, culture, and accessibility. Even with compelling findings from plant-based studies, eradicating meat consumption entirely is neither possible nor culturally realistic.
Anthropological evidence suggests that the consumption of nutrient-rich meat and fat played a significant role in human brain development and cognitive advancement.
That resistance should have inspired constructive discussion: which aspects of the EAT-Lancet can be adapted to local contexts, where the evidence is strong, and where uncertainty persists. Instead, the online discourse shifted to accusations of corruption on one side and conspiracy theories on the other.
The Changing Markets Foundation report documents this digital turbulence — including hashtags, repost patterns, and engagement peaks — and interprets it as evidence of coordinated manipulation.
Even if those patterns reflect partial truth, one lesson stands clear: complex science cannot be condensed into trending hashtags. Social media rewards outrage, not nuance.
The greater irony is that both the EAT-Lancet authors and their critics may share the same long-term vision: improving public health and supporting sustainable food systems. Their paths differ, but their intentions may not.
Conclusions and Key Takeaways
Publicly labeling scientists as “mis-influencers” without definitive proof of misconduct sets a damaging precedent. It discourages open inquiry, leading researchers to self-censor for fear of reputational harm. It also divides the public into factions loyal to personalities rather than to evidence.
Science progresses through skepticism, replication, and open dialogue, not through moral policing. When skepticism is treated as disobedience, we risk losing the diversity of hypotheses that drives discovery.
Consider Dr. Ede’s psychiatric research, which challenges long-held assumptions about glucose metabolism and brain health. Dismissing her work solely because her findings align with animal-based nutrition is not scientific critique — it is rhetorical suppression.
The same applies to environmental scientists like Professor Leroy, whose critiques of life-cycle assessments may identify real methodological gaps, even when his conclusions differ from prevailing narratives.
Calling for balance does not mean excusing industry manipulation. It means ensuring that disagreement is addressed with better evidence, not personal attacks.
If plant-based movements wish to sustain moral and intellectual credibility, they must avoid mirroring the same tactics they condemn in industry: selective framing, amplification without verification, and public targeting of dissenters. Persuasion through evidence is more powerful than humiliation.
Likewise, advocates for animal-inclusive diets must acknowledge the environmental and ethical challenges of industrial agriculture. The future of nutrition cannot rest on slogans like “Meat Heals” or “Plants Save the Planet.” Both oversimplify a complex intersection of health, ecology, and economics.
A respectful, evidence-driven dialogue between these perspectives could advance both human and planetary health far more effectively than polarization ever could.
Science requires courage and compassion. Courage to question prevailing narratives, and compassion to listen when others do.
The Changing Markets Foundation’s investigation may contribute to discussions on communication ethics. Yet it also reveals how delicate the boundary is between holding power accountable and unfairly harming valuable individuals.
As readers, writers, and citizens, we share a duty to protect both transparency and dignity. We can demand openness, rigorous peer review, and ethical standards without turning scientists into targets.
The world faces urgent challenges in nutrition, climate, and health. Solving them requires more credible voices, not fewer.
The researchers named in that report — whether one agrees with them or not — have made measurable contributions to understanding metabolism, mental health, and environmental nutrition. Their ideas deserve examination, not erasure.
Advocating for plant-based diets is a commendable choice. So is supporting omnivorous, carnivorous, or ketogenic approaches grounded in clinical evidence. What is unacceptable is turning science into a battlefield of moral superiority.
If a ketogenic or carnivore-style diet helps a metabolically impaired person regain health and contributes to recovery from mental health conditions — as demonstrated in several clinical studies I have discussed in my articles and books — then such outcomes deserve recognition. Those who research and apply these approaches serve humanity by expanding our understanding of nutrition and healing.
As we approach the release of EAT-Lancet 2.0, there is an opportunity to move from accusation to collaboration, from canceling people to challenging ideas for scientific integrity and progress.
Real progress in public health will arise not from viral hashtags but from humility, the willingness to accept that our understanding of food, and of ourselves, is still unfolding. Our knowledge is but a drop in the ocean; our ignorance is a reminder to stay humble.
I trust that my caring thoughts will be seen in the spirit they are intended. This reflection, drawn from my higher self and my books on ketosis, comes from compassion, not controversy. I have written about ketosis across all dietary spectrums — herbivore, omnivore, and carnivore — because true healing transcends labels.
I shared several sample chapters from my upcoming book Ketosis + BDNF: The Healing Molecules That Saved My Life. Here are the links to the chapters I published as early access to this book. As beta readers, your feedback will be appreciated to refine it and make it a valuable resource for the community.
Ketosis + BDNF: The Healing Molecules That Saved My Life
How I Reversed Metabolic Syndrome, Restored Brain Health, and Regained Vitality After 50medium.com
When My Body Began to Fail Me at a Tender Age
A Sample Chapter from “Ketosis + BDNF: The Healing Molecules That Saved My Life — How I Reversed Metabolic Syndrome…medium.com
What Is Beta-Hydroxybutyrate and Why I Decided to Write a Comprehensive Memoir Book About It
Mother Nature’s Masterpiece: The Molecule That Restores, Protects, and Propels Deserves a Bookmedium.com
Neurobiology of Ketones in the Brain with Practical Lived Experiences
Ketone Bodies Can Lower Stress, Make Us Healthier, and Enhance Our Learning Abilities. Here’s the Summary of Mechanisms…medium.com
Can Ketosis Prevent or Treat Depression and Anxiety?
I Care Deeply About This Question Based on My Research and Personal Experiences, and Here’s What I Can Offer as a…medium.com
Related Stories for Producing Ketones Naturally
β-Hydroxybutyrate: 2 Vital Role of Ketogenesis in the Brain for Dementia Prevention / Treatment
Biochemistry of Ketosis Simplified with Nuanced Perspectives and Personal Experiences
A New Clinical Trial Found a Low-Carb Diet Better Than the Dash.
Perfect Storm in a Teacup: Can Intermittent Fasting Increase Heart Disease Risk by 91%?
Here’s Why I Focus on Nutritional Biochemistry Rather Than Diets
I wrote several stories about ketosis and the ketogenic lifestyle, reflecting my experiences and literature reviews, which you can find in the following list:
Ketosis and Ketogenic Lifestyle
Edit descriptiondr-mehmet-yildiz.medium.com
I wrote many stories explaining the fundamental requirements of the brain and nervous system with nuances in previous stories, so I link them as reference here:
Here’s How to Make the Nervous System More Flexible and Functional
Here’s How I Train My Brain Daily for Mental Clarity and Intellectual Productivity.
You can find many relevant stories about brain health and cognitive performance on this list.
Brain Health and Cognitive Function
Edit descriptiondr-mehmet-yildiz.medium.com
If you are interested in brain and cognition, you may check out this concise book coming soon: What the Brain Needs, Why We Fail, and How We Can Fix It. Here are two sample chapters.
What the Brain Needs, Why We Fail, and How We Can Fix It
Practical Wisdom for Brain Health, Learning, Happiness, and Fulfillment.medium.com
6 Essential Requirements of the Brain
Summary of a sample chapter from my new book “What the Brain Needs, Why We Fail, and How We Can Fix It”medium.com
Quick Updates for Writers and Collaborators
My writing memoir, The Zen of Book Authoring, was globally distributed yesterday. I wrote it to guide aspiring book authors.
Do you have a book that you’d like to have edited, published, and promoted?
If you are a book author, I offer editing, publishing, and marketing help to 100 experts as a pilot based on a revenue-sharing model without any upfront payment. 70 writers from Medium and 691 writers from Substack have already applied for it, but I cannot do more than 100 in 2026. I will scale it after the success of the pilot. I wrote a story about it lately.
Why Am I Investing 3,000 Hours of Editing and Publishing with $0 Upfront Payment for 2026?
Empowering 100 experts to publish books isn’t just an investment of time, but a commitment to knowledge, legacy, and…medium.com
Our content ecosystem is growing rapidly, which will make the Substack Mastery Boost a global service in January 2026. This program excites me as it will help many creators, book authors, and content startups with low-cost educational and marketing support.
I have established multiple networks, including Superlearners, Health and Wellness, Freelancers, Technology Experts, Gamers, Book Authors, Scholars, the Writing Academy, Expert Contributors Network, and finally Affiliate Marketers Network, Authority Building Services, which will integrate with the Substack Mastery Boost program at Digitalmehmet.com, Substackmastery.com, and Illumination.com sites.
I am now working on Authority Building Services. I even wrote a comprehensive book about it titled Neurostrategic Digital Authority Building: How Scholars and Business Executives Turn Expertise into Lasting Influence.
Thank you for reading my story, joining my networks, and being part of my joyful community on Medium, Substack, and Patreon.
I invite you to subscribe to my publications on Substack, where I offer experience-based and original content on health, content strategy, book authoring, and technology topics you can’t find online to inform and inspire my readers.
Healthspan Mastery (NEW)
If you are a writer, you are welcome to join my publications by sending a request via this link. I support 39K writers who contribute to my publications on this platform. You can contact me via my website. If you are a new writer, check out my writing list to find some helpful stories for your education. You can also join my author platform as a guest blogger.
For Substack writers, we created a 6-level course on Udemy titled From Zero to Substack Hero, which I also offer via my Content Strategy, Development, & Marketing Insights on Substack. If you are interested in joining, you can use these discount vouchers:
From Zero to Substack Hero — Level 1, but still comprehensive
From Zero to Substack Hero — Level 2
From Zero to Substack Hero — Level 3
From Zero to Substack Hero — Level 4, 5, and 6 [NEW]
I introduced the new bundle for advanced writers in an article:
From Zero to Substack Hero: Advanced Levels 4, 5, & 6 Bundle Is Ready for Beta Learners
The Gift of Delay, the Promise of Growth: How my hectic schedule, our high standards, and a spirit of generosity shaped…medium.com
Now, we have a new scholarly publication to empower academic writers and educate discerning readers. Here is the invitation to ILLUMINATION Scholar:
A New Star Is Born on Medium🌟: Welcome to Illumination Scholar.
An invitation to the launch day, 25 September 2025, to publish the first set of curated stories on Medium to be…medium.com
What’s Expert Contributor Network at Digitalmehmet — The Digitalmehmet Content Ecosystem
Welcome to the Expert Contributor Network Curation Program at Digitalmehmet Content Ecosystem
I created this new initiative to empower experts and help them transition to the eminence path with community support…medium.com
You can find out about my scholarly work on my Google Scholar or Bohrium profiles and journalism at Muck Rack. Check out my blogs at GoodReads, Blogspot, and my bookstore at Payhip and Gumroad. Some of my technical credentials on Credly. As a new instructor, my Udemy profile includes 4 Substack courses, and I will publish more soon.
You may check out my other most loved stories on this platform.
Here are links to my FEATURED series of 50+ books on Amazon markets:
Substack Newsletter Mastery, Excellence, and Eminence Series
Check out my books at Apple Stores, Smashwords, Vivlio, Kobo, Barnes & Noble, BooskaMillion, Fable, or my discount bookstore. Check out my affiliate shop on Amazon.
Get an email whenever Dr Mehmet Yildiz publishes. He is a top writer and editor on Medium.
dr-mehmet-yildiz.medium.com
You may enjoy this comprehensive free book chapter I wrote for technology, enterprise, and business Architects as a gift: What Is a Digital Transformation Architect? — The Digitalmehmet Content Ecosystem. Check out my updated posts on YouTube.
Explore some of my books including: Train Your Brain for a Healthier and Happier Life, Cortisol Clarity, The Mysterious Leadership Mind of Robert F. Kennedy Jr., Substack Mastery Version 2, Monetize Your Passion with WooCommerce, Agile Business Architecture for Digital Transformation V2, Agile Business Architecture for Digital Transformation (Audiobook), A Powerful Toolkit for Substack Newsletter Mastery, Smart and Ethical SEO, Modern Affiliate Marketing for Writers, 4 Pillars of Enterprise Architecture, and Smart Email Marketing Content Integration, The Zen of Book Authoring
Here is a witty and humorous perspective by Dr Michael Broadly on my site and Medium.com as well.
Top 20 regions this important post inviting peace reached yesterday via our mail subscribers and blog followers
Leave a Reply