Health Wanted: Wellness Scams

The Episode

From magical amulets to metal funnels that cost $270, there are wellness scams all around for those who have eyes to see them. This week on Health Wanted, we’re preparing for April Fools’ Day by reviewing some health and wellness products, practices, and claims so ridiculous they make you say, “this is a joke, right?”

Listen now

The Listener Questions

Why does everything suddenly have added protein? Is protein coffee just a marketing trend?

While there is no single source that sparked this protein craze, some have suggested it might be tied to the rise in GLP-1s, because using them can take away both fat and muscle. That can require people to be on a higher protein diet to maintain muscle mass.

Our current health secretary has also put a particular emphasis on protein, for reasons that are unclear, and there is no denying that protein has become a buzzword in health and wellness circles. And if everyone is talking about it, of course major coffee chains like Starbucks, Dutch Bros, and Dunkin’, would jump on the bandwagon and offer protein-enhanced coffee. In fact, the number of high-protein drinks on the market rose by 122% from 2020 to 2024.

While there is valid protein hype (it is an essential macronutrient after all), most Americans already consume plenty of it. Current intake levels average about 1 gram per kilogram of body weight, which is within the recommended range, and more isn’t necessarily better. One study found that the benefits of protein plateau at an intake of 1.6 grams per kilogram of body weight a day. Consuming more than that offers no extra advantage.

Instead, research suggests that it’s the source of protein, rather than the amount, that likely makes a difference for our health. When you get these nutrients from whole foods instead of supplements, you also get all the other goodness in those foods, which likely contributes to the observed benefits.

In terms of protein and coffee, it appears that most coffee shops are using “protein milk” to help boost the amount of protein in their drinks. A standard 16-ounce latte made with normal cow's milk contains about 9 to 12 grams of protein. A 16-ounce “protein latte” from Starbucks, on the other hand, contains about 27 grams of protein.  

Additionally, many of these protein-packed drinks are also loaded with sugar, carbohydrates, and fats. So, while the allure of enhanced protein intake may make these drinks appealing, more protein doesn’t automatically translate to healthier.

How can food producers get away with misleading customers about things like fat and calorie content? Is the U.S. food system not regulated enough?

The makers of David protein bars are being sued right now for “violating U.S. Food and Drug Administration regulations and misleading customers” because the bars, which are marketed as having 150 calories and 28 grams of protein, allegedly contain 83% more calories and 400% more fat than what’s on the label.

It’s important to say “allegedly” here, because some food and nutrition scientists have brought up a very valid point that this lawsuit might be based on faulty science.

The way that we measure calories in food is, essentially, by burning the food and seeing how much energy is released. But because we actually absorb food, rather than burning it, there are some additional calculations for estimating how much of an item is fat, carbs, or protein.

David bars don’t use regular fat sources to give their bars the right texture and taste; they use something called esterified propoxylated glycerol (EPG), a fat replacement that is much lower in calories because much of it cannot be absorbed by the body and passes through digestion.

So if you’re relying on a testing method that uses energy released, or weight as a proxy for how many calories or fat something contains, then you’re going to over estimate those numbers in a product that uses a fat replacement that is significantly lower in calories than fat from naturally occurring foodstuffs. 

Which appears to be what’s happening here. EPG is .7kcal/g and regular fat is 9kcal/g.

The brand has come out, multiple times, to reiterate that it’s product is in fact 150 calories, and that they do follow the calculations for EPG that the FDA has set when it comes to nutrition labels.

So it’s a pretty good example of the importance of both using the appropriate method when testing the contents of something, and also to not put too much weight into a lawsuit before it’s settled.

Catch all the listener questions and Laurel’s answers on the full episode of Health Wanted by:

• Streaming at wabe.org or the WABE app
• Subscribing on Apple or Spotify
• Watching on WABE's YouTube channel