I’ll get to the current science but first I feel like its necessary to point out the complexity of a free market that involves both scientific research and product development with regards to health.

I think we need to be weary of broadly criticizing studies simply based on who funds them. I stand by this statement despite examples of data fudging because we actually need industry funding, it is the ideal way things work as long as it is done well.

If you want to release a product, you should be responsible or at least partially responsible for proving that it works in the ways you advertise it. At the very least you should prove that it is harmless but I believe we should be aiming higher. We should also want third party, neutral institutions to research compounds and compound blends that exist in the market. It is important to have multiple sources of gatekeeping when it comes to health information and product development, be they medications or supplements. Testing is very expensive which is why its preferable that industry pays for it but neutrality is also important which is why government led programs have historically been responsible for it. As of late the general public has had diminishing trust in these organizations. People want neutral testing but they often poopoo the institutions that do it best. So what do we do about it?

A good ground rule for trusting results is to defer to the conclusions of multiple specialists or multiple institutions Are studies being repeated in different countries by different organizations? If yes, then we are approximating truth as best we can. The chances of negligence or corruption across the globe is virtually zero. The practice of empirical research has its own guard rails that will often catch the wrong doers, though it does take time.

We have this exact scenario for collagen supplements and despit emy first statement the results point toward industry funded studies being biased. The only studies that suggest a benefit for skin health are ones performed by companies that sell the product while independent institutional studies show no benefit. This brand new meta analysis looking at the effects of collagen on skin aging reviewed 23 randomized control trials. They found that collagen supplements improved skin hydration, elasticity and wrinkles. But in a subgroup review looking at funding sources, they found that the control trials with funding from pharmaceutical companies showed significant benefits while the ones who had independent funding did not. When separating high quality studies from lower quality studies they found similar results, with the lower quality studies being the ones that showed significant benefit.

Occasionally, outlier studies that show a large benefit can skew the over all results of a meta analysis or study review. Sometimes it is because of a larger study group or a stronger effect result. But if these outlier studies are of poorer quality then they will skew the average result in a way that creates the wrong “consensus”. This is why a sensitivity analysis as they did in the above review can be helpful in pointing out the more general picture.

As far as collagen having potential benefits for connective tissue synthesis, some of the best labs in the world have found little to no evidence for this.

In 2022 a narrative review outlined a clear benefit of protein supplementation on muscle synthesis yet no data has shown a link between dietary protein intake and connective tissue building. Up until this point, most studies looked at ingestion of essential amino acids through whey or dairy based supplementation. It was theorized that collagen supplements might stimulate connective tissue synthesis because of its high content of certain amino acids or through some sort of stimulatory mechanism of specific peptides.

But then in 2023 this study from Luc Van Loon et.al. showed that neither whey protein nor collagen supplements increased muscle connective tissue synthesis post exercise.

It’s fair to say that we need more studies to fully disprove any positive action on connective tissue from collagen supplementation. A couple other studies do exist showing a small potential benefit from doses of 15g/day. But there may be a funding bias and considering that the Van Loon study used 30g doses as compared to an equal dose of whey protein and a placebo group I am not convinced that we will see positive results when the study is well designed

My take on this is that so far it looks like it is a waste of money. I’m agnostic in that I am willing to change my mind but I don’t understand the mechanism by which consuming collagen would help build it. If you currently take a collagen supplement and feel like it is helping you then go for it. I would reassess that the brand you use is third party tested for safety but once that is determined these supplements seem to be harmless even at high doses.

Though the harm that might exist is that the placebo effect of a supplement or a procedure like acupuncture might get in the way of finding something that actually will help you in the long term. Placebo is not always a benign tool for relief.

Be kind to each other,

Joey

Ozempic and other GLP-1 receptor agonists are both controversial and incredibly popular. The popularity and controversy stems mostly from its efficacy as a weight loss drug but this is only one small part of the story. I think weight loss, as a topic is an emotional trigger for people and because of this, the logical fallacies of Internet-land begin to pop up. The utopian future where people don’t take these drugs to lose weight is far off, if at all possible and so I think it is worthwhile to offer some insight as to when and how to use these drugs,. It is also important to know that these drugs are multi-functional. They may offer people a lot of benefit when taken properly and while some people will always see it as a cop out, it is by no means a free lunch. If you take it as it is often prescribed you may be in for some real problems.

In the current world of obsessive optimization its not hard to find yourself ordering loads of supplements, each one lauded as the next super ant-oxidant or life extension compound. Taking all the advice of Andrew Huberman, Rhonda Patrick and Ben Greenfield I would need to work extra hours each week to just to afford the pills…where would I find the time to add the daily sunlight, sauna, cold plunge, meditation, breath work, skin tapping, workout, meal prep, yoga, grounding and whatever else these health gurus suggest I need to make time for. Not that these sup’ pushers don’t dole out great advice on health and wellness, they do but things have really taken a turn towards what most nutrition experts call disordered eating (if you consider supplements as eating).