3 ms·
The host in this case is a significant investor in Huel who seemingly fails to mention his relationship to it when bigging it up. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/ar
by throw646577 2y ago
The host in this case is a significant investor in Huel who seemingly fails to mention his relationship to it when bigging it up.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c0rwz5xkrg8o https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c0rwz5xkrg8o
To me it casts any discussion of nutrition on his podcast in a somewhat different, less than neutral light.
- lambdaba 2y agoOkay, but the parent was implying that would discredit the interviewee. One thing I've observed with people that have an important message to disseminate is they are not fussy about what the medium is
- throw646577 2y agoI don't know if it would or would not. But some cynicism feels warranted by association. And then there's the further research you can do: https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/ketogenic-diets-for-cancer-hype-versus-science/ https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/ketogenic-diets-for-cancer-... I dunno. I don't know enough to evaluate this in precise detail. But I do know enough to feel cynicism about extraordinary claims.
- deprecative 2y agoIf you have significant financial interest in a product or service you're not going to bring on someone who will meaningfully oppose that product or service. Therefore anyone who goes onto that podcast, or whatever media, would be selected for.