Fork U with Dr. Terry Simpson Podcast Por Terry Simpson arte de portada

Fork U with Dr. Terry Simpson

Fork U with Dr. Terry Simpson

De: Terry Simpson
Escúchala gratis

Fork U(niversity) Not everything you put in your mouth is good for you. There’s a lot of medical information thrown around out there. How are you to know what information you can trust, and what’s just plain old quackery? You can’t rely on your own “google fu”. You can’t count on quality medical advice from Facebook. You need a doctor in your corner. On each episode of Your Doctor’s Orders, Dr. Terry Simpson will cut through the clutter and noise that always seems to follow the latest medical news. He has the unique perspective of a surgeon who has spent years doing molecular virology research and as a skeptic with academic credentials. He’ll help you develop the critical thinking skills so you can recognize evidence-based medicine, busting myths along the way. The most common medical myths are often disguised as seemingly harmless “food as medicine”. By offering their own brand of medicine via foods, These hucksters are trying to practice medicine without a license. And though they’ll claim “nutrition is not taught in medical schools”, it turns out that’s a myth too. In fact, there’s an entire medical subspecialty called Culinary Medicine, and Dr. Simpson is certified as a Culinary Medicine Specialist. Where today's nutritional advice is the realm of hucksters, Dr. Simpson is taking it back to the realm of science.Copyright 2026 Terry Simpson Ciencia Ciencias Biológicas Enfermedades Físicas Higiene y Vida Saludable
Episodios
  • The Peptide Bazaar: Real Medicine vs. Vials from the Internet

    The Peptide Bazaar: Real Medicine vs. Vials from the Internet
    Apr 16 2026
    The word “peptide” is doing too much workLet’s start with the simplest truth.A peptide is just a chain of amino acids—like pearls on a necklace. That’s it. Nothing mystical. Nothing magical.However, structure matters. Sequence matters. Biology cares deeply about both.Because of that, some peptides are extraordinarily powerful. Others are biologically interesting. And a growing number are simply… marketed.That last category is where things get messy.Before the hype, there was a miracleNow rewind to a hospital ward in Toronto in the early 1920s.Children with diabetes were dying. Not slowly improving. Not plateauing. Dying.Then Frederick Banting and Charles Best walked in with something crude and experimental.Insulin.They injected it.The children woke up.Not metaphorically. Not in a graph. They woke up. Families watched death reverse in real time.That is what a peptide can do when it actually works.Then came the desert and the lizardFast forward a few decades.Out in the Southwest—near where I started my first job as a bariatric surgeon in Phoenix—lives the Gila monster. Not exactly a creature you expect to change medicine.Yet inside its venom was a peptide that led, eventually, to drugs like:SemaglutideThat discovery didn’t go straight to Instagram.Instead, it went through:receptor biologypharmacologyclinical trialsoutcomes researchAnd the results were real:lower blood sugarmeaningful weight lossreduced cardiovascular riskSo yes, peptides can be extraordinary.But only when the science is finished.And then we lost the plotNow, enter the modern peptide market.Suddenly, everything is a peptide. Everything promises:healingrecoveryfat lossanti-agingYou’ve seen the names:BPC-157TB-500CJC-1295IpamorelinMOTS-cAOD-9604Meanwhile, they are sold in places that should make you pause immediately.Gyms.Wellness clinics.Online “research chemical” shops.Rarely, if ever, through the same channels as actual medicine.BPC-157: the peptide that does everything… on paperStart with the most famous one.BPC-157 is marketed as a cure-all:tendon healinggut repairanti-inflammatoryaccelerated recoveryThe claims are sweeping. The confidence is impressive.But then you look at the evidence.Animal studies? Yes.Human randomized trials? No.Long-term safety? Also no.That gap matters.Because when something claims to stimulate healing broadly, it raises an uncomfortable question:What else might it stimulate?The answer, at this point, is simple.We don’t know.TB-500: recovery without receiptsNext comes TB-500.It is sold as a recovery peptide. It promises faster healing and improved flexibility.The biology is plausible. The mechanism sounds reasonable.Yet human evidence for those claims is lacking.Even so, it thrives in:bodybuilding circlesperformance clinicsonline forumsIn other words, environments where anecdote travels faster than data.Hormone peptides: changing numbers vs. changing outcomesNow we get to the hormone crowd.CJC-1295 and Ipamorelin are sold as a stack. They stimulate growth hormone release.That part is real.What comes next is not.Because increasing a hormone level is not the same as improving health.We do not have strong evidence for:long-term outcomessafety over yearsmeaningful clinical benefitsStill, they are marketed as anti-aging therapies.That leap—from signal to certainty—is where the trouble begins.Melanotan II: the one that proves the ruleMelanotan II is different.It actually does something.It increases pigmentation. It affects melanocortin receptors.And with that comes:nauseablood pressure changesmole darkeningdocumented toxicitySo here is the lesson.When a peptide truly works, you don’t get silence. You get side effects.The absence of side effects in marketing should never reassure you.It should make you suspicious.AOD-9604 and MOTS-c: the fantasy layerAt the far end of the spectrum are peptides like AOD-9604 and MOTS-c.They promise:targeted fat lossexercise-like metabolic effectslongevityThe evidence?Mostly cells and animals.Yet they are already being sold, injected, and promoted.At this point, we are not even pretending to wait for human data.Where these actually come fromNow let’s talk about the vial.Because this is where things shift from questionable to concerning.Many of these peptides are:manufactured overseasshipped in bulkrepackagedrelabeledThey are often sold as:“research chemicals”“wellness therapies”Independent testing has found:incorrect dosingcontaminationinconsistent puritySo when someone says they are taking a specific peptide, the real answer is uncertain.They hope they are.Why this is suddenly in the newsRecently, Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has pushed to expand access to peptides restricted by the FDA.The argument is framed as freedom.The FDA’s concern is simpler:lack of safety datarisk of contaminationunknown long-term effectsIn other words, we do not yet know enough to call these safe.That is not obstruction.That is the job.GLP-1: the difference data makesNow ...
    Más Menos
    10 m
  • Fat Shaming and GLP-1 - It's Biology

    Fat Shaming and GLP-1 - It's Biology
    Apr 9 2026
    The Chorus of “Just Eat Less”Spend a few minutes on social media, and you will hear it. On Bill Maher's podcast the other day, I heard it. Two people who know less about GLP-1 drugs than almost anyone, opining about how GLP-1s are horrific.Bill Maher says, “Just eat less.”Jillian Michaels warns that GLP-1 medications are dangerous. Did she even graduate from college?Meanwhile, a rotating cast of gym bros, coaches, and influencers insists that anyone using these medications is taking the easy way out.At first glance, these seem like different voices. A comedian, a fitness personality, a group of online trainers.However, they are all saying the same thing.If you are overweight, this is your fault.If you need help, you are weak.If you use medication, you are cheating.That message travels well. It is simple. It fits into a tweet. It sounds like common sense. Science shows us that fat shaming doesn't work (reference).It is also wrong.Who Is Doing the Shaming—and WhyThe fitness industry has something to lose here, and that part is easy to understand. Entire businesses are built on the idea that weight loss is a matter of discipline. Follow the plan, buy the program, track the macros, and success will follow. If it doesn’t, the explanation is built in.You didn’t try hard enough.However, the criticism does not stop there.When someone like Bill Maher reduces obesity to “just eat less,” it is not about selling a diet plan. Instead, it reflects something else entirely. A kind of cultural impatience with complexity. A belief that if a problem can be described simply, it must also be solved simply.And when that belief meets a condition like obesity, the result is dismissal.If I don’t struggle with this, then it must not be real.If you do struggle, then you must be doing something wrong.That is not analysis.That is a failure of imagination.The Problem with Simple AnswersMedicine has a long history of being wrong in simple ways.We once believed ulcers were caused by stress alone. Then came Helicobacter pylori and antibiotic treatment. We once thought hypertension was simply a matter of salt intake and personality. Then we developed therapies that addressed the underlying physiology.Obesity has followed a similar path, except we have been slower to let go of the old explanation.“Eat less, move more” is not incorrect.It is incomplete.Because it ignores the system that determines how much you want to eat, how often you think about food, and how your body responds when you try to lose weight.The Part I Didn’t AdmitFor years, I saw the damage this thinking caused.I ran support groups for patients struggling with weight. I watched them come in carrying not just pounds, but shame. They believed they were weak, that they lacked discipline, that something about them was broken.We worked to change that.We talked about biology. About appetite regulation. About how the body defends weight. We tried to replace blame with understanding.And yet, I quietly held myself to a different standard.I didn’t blame my patients.I blamed myself.The Surgeon Who Thought He Could Outwork BiologyIf anyone should be able to power through something, it is a surgeon. That is the job. Endure long hours. Stay focused. Push through fatigue. Delay gratification.So I assumed I could do the same with weight.I tried diets. I cleaned things up. I ate vegetables, cut back on certain foods, and experimented with structure. And like many people, I saw results.At first.Weight loss is not the mystery.Weight maintenance is.Because over time, the same thing happened again and again. The body adapted. Hunger increased. Energy dipped. The system pushed back.And eventually, the weight returned.What the Data Shows (and Why It Matters)When you look beyond personal stories and examine long-term studies, the pattern becomes clear.In the Diabetes Prevention Program, participants lost weight early, then gradually regained some of it. In the Look AHEAD trial, an intensive lifestyle intervention produced initial success, but the gap narrowed over time.Observational data suggest that only a small percentage of people—often cited around 3 to 5 percent—maintain significant weight loss at five years.That number should change the conversation.Because it tells us this is not a widespread failure of discipline.It is a predictable outcome of a biological system.The Loop We Keep IgnoringWeight gain does not happen in isolation. It is part of a loop.Sleep worsens, which increases appetite. Movement becomes uncomfortable, so activity declines. Food becomes more rewarding, not less, because it offers relief.Then intake increases.Then the cycle repeats.And yet, into that loop, we continue to insert the same advice.Try harder.What Finally ChangedFor years, I thought I just needed to try harder myself.I was wrong.Today, I am down fifty pounds.Not because I discovered a better diet, but because something changed in the system itself.I started a GLP-1–based ...
    Más Menos
    8 m
  • Menopause: Estrogen Effects Satiety

    Menopause: Estrogen Effects Satiety
    Apr 2 2026
    Menopause, Hunger, and the Brain: Why It Feels DifferentMenopause changes more than temperature control. It reshapes how the brain handles hunger, fullness, and the quiet signals that guide eating. As a result, many women notice something unsettling. The same meals no longer satisfy. Hunger arrives sooner. Food feels louder.For years, we blamed metabolism. We told women their bodies were simply slowing down. While that explanation sounds scientific, it misses the most important part of the story.The brain has changed.A Pattern You Can’t IgnoreDuring my years performing weight loss surgery, about 80 percent of my patients were women. Over time, one pattern became impossible to overlook. When menopause or even perimenopause began, weight gain often followed.Some women had struggled with weight for years. Others had never given it much thought. Yet both groups described the same shift. They weren’t necessarily eating more. Instead, they felt hungrier, less satisfied, and more aware of food throughout the day.Meanwhile, the advice they received rarely evolved. Eat less. Move more. Try harder.However, that advice assumes the system regulating hunger still works the same way. In menopause, it doesn’t.Estrogen and the Appetite Control CenterTo understand what’s happening, we need to look at the hypothalamus. This small but powerful region of the brain regulates appetite, energy balance, and hormonal signaling. Under normal conditions, estrogen helps keep this system stable.Specifically, estrogen supports satiety signals and keeps hunger signals in check. In simple terms, it helps your brain recognize when you’ve had enough.As estrogen declines, that balance shifts. Hunger signals grow stronger. Fullness signals become less reliable. Consequently, the internal experience of eating begins to change.This shift explains why women often say, “I feel different around food,” even before their diet changes.Why Hunger Changes FirstInterestingly, appetite changes often appear before measurable increases in calorie intake. Women report thinking about food more often, feeling less satisfied after meals, and noticing hunger earlier in the day.At first glance, nothing looks different from the outside. Yet internally, the system has already shifted.Because of that, traditional advice falls short. Telling someone to eat less without addressing the change in signaling is like adjusting the thermostat while ignoring the wiring.More Than MetabolismAlthough metabolism does change with age, it does not fully explain the experience of menopause-related hunger. A slower metabolic rate might affect how calories are used, but it doesn’t explain why appetite feels louder or less controlled.Instead, the better explanation lies in the brain. The hypothalamus responds differently when estrogen levels fall. As a result, the signals that guide eating become less precise.In other words, this isn’t just about calories in and calories out. It’s about how the body decides when to eat—and when to stop.The Part We Should Have Addressed SoonerFor decades, menopause care focused on symptoms like hot flashes and bone health. Meanwhile, changes in appetite and weight were often attributed to lifestyle or willpower.Unfortunately, that approach overlooked a key fact. Estrogen plays a direct role in appetite regulation.Because of that, many women were told to push harder when their biology had already shifted. That message wasn’t just incomplete—it was unfair.Estrogen Replacement: A Broader RoleWhen clinicians discuss estrogen replacement, they often focus on symptom relief. However, estrogen also affects brain signaling related to hunger and satiety.In the right patient, hormone therapy may help restore some of that balance. It can improve how the brain responds to fullness and reduce the intensity of hunger signals.Importantly, hormone therapy does not inherently cause weight gain. That belief has persisted longer than the evidence supports.Still, therapy isn’t for everyone. Each patient requires an individualized discussion that considers risks, benefits, and goals.A New Layer: GLP-1 and Appetite ControlMore recently, GLP-1 receptor agonists have added another dimension to this conversation. These medications act on the same appetite centers in the brain, strengthening satiety and quieting hunger.Interestingly, estrogen appears to enhance the effectiveness of GLP-1 signaling. Therefore, menopause may not only reduce estrogen levels—it may also decrease the brain’s responsiveness to satiety cues.This interaction helps explain why some women experience such a dramatic shift in appetite during midlife.What Actually HelpsOnce you understand the biology, the approach changes.Rather than focusing solely on restriction, the goal becomes supporting satiety. Meals should include enough protein, fiber, and volume to sustain fullness. Additionally, sleep deserves attention, as poor sleep amplifies hunger signals. Medication ...
    Más Menos
    7 m
Todas las estrellas
Más relevante
I have been following. Dr Simpson for awhile now, he is so knowledgeable and speaks to us ðirectly. Thank you for being a wonderful teacher !@

love learning from Dr Simpnon

Se ha producido un error. Vuelve a intentarlo dentro de unos minutos.