part one – emotion

I watched a Polish #video the other day – a #conversation between journalist Bogdan Rymanowski and professor Grażyna Cichosz. It’s called “żywieniowy przekręt (link here),” which roughly means “the nutrition scam.” It’s a long, emotional talk about #food, #health, and a global #conspiracy that, according to the professor, has been poisoning us for decades. I didn’t plan to watch it. someone I know sent it to me, meaning it was worth watching. but I could feel what she meant. and that’s what caught my attention – not the #video itself, but how easily we still believe in something just because it feels powerful, dramatic, or brave.

the professor speaks with #confidence – about #butter and #margarine, #cholesterol, #meat, #soy, and how “they” (globalists, corporations, #scientists, whoever fits the narrative) have fooled the #world. she calls modern dietetics a #lie, #science a fraud, and people in power part of a massive plan.

it’s emotional, almost theatrical. and that’s the thing – it works.

because when someone speaks with #anger, with that mix of disappointment and certainty, it feels real. #anger is convincing. #science rarely is. #science is slow, careful, full of “maybes” and “in some cases.” anger is simple: they lied, I know the truth.

there’s something fascinating about how well such stories sell. they promise something that #science never gives – #clarity. no nuance, no complexity, no boring #numbers. just villains, heroes, and simple rules: eat #eggs, not #soy. trust #butter, not #doctors. and we love that. because it’s easier to feel betrayed than to feel #confused. but here’s what I believe: most people in #science are not trying to trick us. they may be wrong sometimes – that’s part of the process – but they’re not plotting to destroy #humanity. they’re learning, correcting, improving. they move slower, yes, but they move forward. the world is not perfect, but it’s not one big plot either.

and maybe that’s what we keep forgetting: that the real manipulation often comes from those who claim to fight manipulation. the loudest “truth-tellers” are sometimes the best storytellers. they play on fear, on nostalgia, on anger. they sound brave, but they’re not free – they’re addicted to #conflict.

and people who just try to do #science, quietly, without drama, will always lose in the attention game.

I’m not writing this to attack that professor or anyone else. I’m writing this because I see how fast these stories spread – and how little we stop to think before believing them.

maybe there’s no giant conspiracy after all.

maybe it’s just that #fear sells better than patience.

part two – evidence

after watching the #video, I couldn’t just leave it there. I wanted to know what’s actually true – not from YouTube, not from headlines, but from real #science. so I decided to check every key claim professor Cichosz made, one by one. to do that, I used #ai – my assistant – #steven (chatgpt) – to help me search through scientific databases, WHO and EFSA reports, and peer-reviewed studies. together we built this second part: a clear, fact-based summary that separates what’s real from what’s just rhetoric. it’s not about proving someone wrong – it’s about showing how #science actually looks when you strip away drama. and – of course – about learning something new for myself.

1 · Animal fats vs plant oils

Modern research doesn’t confirm that animal fat is “healthy” or that vegetable oils are carcinogenic.

Large meta-analyses (Harvard School of Public Health, 2020–2023) show that replacing saturated fats with unsaturated plant oils lowers the risk of cardiovascular disease by 10–25%.

The only truly harmful fats were industrial trans fats – used in old margarines – now banned in the EU and US. Today’s margarines contain natural plant oils and have neutral or even positive lipid effects.

conclusion: her criticism was once partly valid (for 1980s margarines), but no longer.

2 · Cholesterol and heart disease

Dietary cholesterol plays a smaller role than we once thought, but LDL-cholesterol and saturated fat still strongly correlate with atherosclerosis.

WHO and American Heart Association both maintain that keeping LDL low saves lives.

Randomized trials (2019–2024) consistently show fewer heart events when LDL is reduced – regardless of diet or medication.

conclusion: calling the “cholesterol story” a scam is false; science simply refined, not reversed, its position.

3 · Soy and GMO safety

More than 20 years of global research (WHO, EFSA, FDA) confirm that GMO soy is safe for humans and animals.

Clinical studies find no link between soy consumption and thyroid disorders, infertility, or autoimmune disease.

On the contrary, moderate soy intake (tofu, soy milk) may lower LDL and reduce menopausal symptoms.

conclusion: demonizing soy and GMO has no scientific basis.

4 · Aspartame and MSG

Both have been examined exhaustively.

• Aspartame: EFSA (2023) and WHO (2024) reaffirmed it safe at normal intake levels (< 40 mg/kg bw).
• MSG: large reviews show no consistent evidence of neurological harm; it doesn’t cross the blood–brain barrier in dietary amounts.

conclusion: fear-based myths – not data – drive these claims.

5 · “People gain weight from insulin, not calories”

The carbohydrate–insulin model is an oversimplification.

Weight gain occurs when caloric intake exceeds expenditure; insulin influences how energy is stored but not the first law of thermodynamics.

Low-carb diets work because they increase satiety, not because calories “don’t matter.”

conclusion: partial truth twisted into a catchy slogan.

6 · Potassium iodate in salt

Used safely for decades to prevent iodine deficiency disorders.

Both EFSA and WHO state there’s no evidence of inflammatory or toxic effects at the levels used in food fortification.

conclusion: myth – iodate is not pro-inflammatory nor dangerous.

7 · High-protein diets (≈ 30% of energy)

For healthy adults, up to 30–35% of energy from protein is considered safe; it can help with satiety and muscle maintenance.

However, long-term high-protein diets aren’t recommended for people with kidney disease or gout.

The global consensus (WHO, FAO, EFSA) still sets the general target at 10–20% of energy.

conclusion: potentially useful in specific cases, but not a universal rule.

final thought

well, #science doesn’t speak in headlines. it moves slowly, checks itself, and admits when it’s wrong. that’s why it’s trustworthy – not because it’s perfect, but because it’s honest about uncertainty.

so yes, #butter is fine, but not holy. #soy is fine, but not magic. and maybe the only real “nutrition scam” is believing anyone who says they’ve found the truth.

this is also available in: