On January 28, CBS News announced that it was adding 19 new expert contributors, including three popular health influencers: Peter Attia, Andrew Huberman, and Mark Hyman. Two days later, Peter Attia’s name appeared more than 1,700 times in the latest release of the Epstein files, including emails referencing Jeffrey Epstein’s lifestyle and containing sexually explicit jokes. On February 4th, CBS News announced it would be keeping him on staff.
Beyond the obvious reason above, let’s talk about the larger public health danger of platforming these individuals. At first glance, bringing these well-recognized health figures in may seem like a win for audiences seeking credible health information. But this situation raises an important question: Who are these experts, and how reliable is the advice they provide?
Peter Attia is the author of New York Times bestseller Outlive, hosts The Drive podcast, and operates a concierge medical practice where he charges clients more than $100,000 per year to work with him. He brands himself as a “longevity expert,” and promotes an intensive, data-driven approach to extending lifespan.
Much of Attia’s advice is reasonable: exercise regularly, sleep well, eat whole foods. But this is paired with an emphasis on intensive monitoring and costly “optimization” strategies that lack strong scientific evidence, which he often has commercial interests in.
One example of this is his promotion of continuous glucose monitors (CGMs) for healthy, non-diabetic individuals to guide changes to their nutrition and lifestyle habits. There isn’t any scientific evidence that routine glucose monitoring improves health outcomes in nondiabetics. In addition, data from CGMs is difficult to interpret and can often lead users to unnecessarily restrict foods and develop anxiety around eating carbohydrate-containing foods that “spike blood sugar.” These devices are also uncomfortable, and some cost hundreds of dollars per month in subscription fees.
Attia rarely adequately discusses these downsides of wearing a CGM — and also doesn’t disclose that he's an advisor to Dexcom, a company that sells CGM devices. Attia also promotes extensive blood testing, whole-body MRI screening, genetic testing, and unproven pharmaceutical interventions, all under the guise of extending lifespan, but most of this is not based on strong evidence.
Through his books, podcasts, and media appearances, Attia promotes the message that optimal health requires constant surveillance and financial investment. While preventive medicine matters, much of what is being promoted lacks strong evidence and is embedded in financial conflicts of interest.
The same can be said about Andrew Huberman, a Stanford neuroscientist and host of the Huberman Lab Podcast. Huberman is presented as a rigorous, science-based voice, but much of his platform is built around monetizing “biohacking” culture.
For example, Huberman often talks about the health benefits of cold plunging and has even released cold plunge protocols that he recommends, which he presents as “science-based.”
In reality, there are no established health benefits from cold plunging. He is misrepresenting the results of weak research and overselling the health benefits of cold exposure to promote cold-plunge devices that cost upwards of $6,000. He also promotes red light devices, blood glucose monitors, lab testing, fitness trackers, and lots and lots of supplements, often by overstating the research on the benefits of using these products while downplaying or fully ignoring the risks.
As with Attia, the problem isn't that the information Huberman discusses is completely misleading. It mostly consists of helpful information and practical recommendations, but it’s mixed in with overly complex protocols that are lacking scientific support and rife with conflicts of interest, which are difficult to tease out.
The same can also be said about Mark Hyman, the third health expert being brought on by CBS News. Hyman is a leading figure in the field of “functional medicine,” which claims to distinguish itself from conventional medicine by utilizing cutting-edge testing and natural approaches to health.
The model is simple: identify or create dubious health problems such as “toxin overload,” “leaky gut,” or mitochondrial dysfunction, and recommend lab testing and supplement protocols that you financially benefit from.
Mark Hyman is a co-founder of Function Health, a direct-to-consumer blood testing company. While lab testing is very useful in medical settings, purchasing lab tests without appropriate medical guidance carries risks of misinterpretation of results, false positives, unnecessary (and expensive) follow-ups, and increased health anxiety.
Mark Hyman also operates a large online store selling hundreds of supplements and supplement stacks that are marketed for everything from detoxification, hormone balance, longevity, and more. Not only are these often lacking scientific evidence, but many of these supplement stacks also contain potentially dangerous levels of certain nutrients.
For example, his Foundational supplement stack, which costs around $200 per month, includes 7,000 IU of vitamin D per day, nearly 10 times our daily need for Vitamin D, and nearly twice the 4,000 IU recommended upper limit. This amount has the potential to cause Vitamin D toxicity.
Like Huberman and Attia, Hyman promotes an individualistic and commercialized brand of health that centers around optimization, control, and novelty to sell listeners a concept of health that will always be out of reach. One that you can only get closer to by buying more products and following more protocols.
To be clear, this doesn’t mean Attia, Huberman, or Hyman are always wrong, or that they’re not smart people. As I have said throughout, a lot of the information they share is useful, and they often interview credible researchers on their podcasts and websites.
But their business models depend on audiences being encouraged to believe that ordinary living is insufficient without constant monitoring, specialized devices, supplements, and premium services. This is where journalism has a responsibility to be cautious.
When CBS News designates these influencers with deep commercial entanglements as “expert contributors” and widens their platform, it further perpetuates this cycle of pseudoscientific health consumerism being passed off as sound evidence-based health advice.
There is no shortage of qualified physicians, epidemiologists, and public health researchers who could serve as expert contributors and bring a sound scientific voice to the public. These scientists don’t have the name recognition that these influencers do, but they're far more aligned with scientific rigor and the public interest.
CBS News prioritizing brand power over sound science reflects a broader media trend. In an era already saturated with misinformation and health anxiety, this is a dangerous direction.
The line between expert and influencer has never been more blurred.
Dr. Adrian Chavez is a PhD-trained nutrition scientist specializing in metabolic health and chronic disease prevention with over a decade of experience translating research into practical health advice. He shares practical, science-backed guidance through his podcast, The Nutrition Science Podcast, and other online platforms.
