720 Egg-periment. What I Learned and What's to Come...

I ate 720 eggs in 1 month. Then I got an idea...

My latest YouTube video yielded some unexpected benefits, including strong engagement metrics and multi-platform growth, as well as the egg-cellent prize of free eggs for a year!

The video:

Free Eggs!

But before I go ahead and do the tactically obvious -- attempt to replicate this ‘outlier of success’ -- I want to give you my “WHY,” because my endgame is not clicks and free eggs.

Curiosity as a Driver

Those of you who know me know I’m a curious person. I always have been. Even at 7 years old, when I’d find a dead snake in the woods with a lump in its belly, I’d need to perform a dissection to discover what the heck was in there?!

• Was it a mouse?

• Was the snake pregnant?

• How do snakes even get pregnant?

• Do boy snakes have penises?

• Why had I never seen a snake penis?

(Yes, at 7 I’d learned about the birds and the bees. My dad is an OB/GYN and my mom is a psychiatrist, so that learning happened early)

Anyway, I’ve always been driven by curiosity. And I’ve used that drive to excel in my academics and in research. But, as I developed in my (still young) academic career, I learned more about the scientific method and how to apply it to leverage my curiosity.

But, I lost something in the process…

Science: Cold or Personal

The scientific method, in its purest form is cold and emotionless.

It’s a processes of hypothesis generation, testing, data collection, and repeat. “There’s no room for emotions in pure science,” or so I thought.

What I’ve learned over the past several years, particularly since starting to develop a social media presence, is that to “sell science” – by which I mean enticing people to engage with the data and their implications – you need to turn the data into stories. You need to make it personal, and relevant for the people you want to engage.

This dimension of storytelling around science is why I have social media in the first place. How to make someone without a hardcore scientific background appreciate how the central amygdala, CNX, Brunner’s gland axis is relevant to their gut health and their choice of television show, or how the APMK-MNK-eIF4E axis is relevant to their dietary choices, is to me an egg-citing challenge.

(Yes, these are teasers of upcoming content…)

Amplifying Our Research

However, in the end what I really care about is advancing research that matters.

For example, I feel our research on lipids on a ketogenic diet and lean mass hyper-responders and the lipid energy model could truly be revolutionary.

However, despite the blood, sweat and tears colleagues and I spend behind the scenes on the research, once the data are collected, written up, and published in peer review, if they aren’t disseminated…

Well… it’s like the philosophical question about a tree falling in a forest: “If research are published and people don’t read or talk about them, were they even published?”

Point being, conducting the research is only half the battle. We are then tasked with making it news and getting it attention. This is not just for vanity metrics, but because talk and attention drive future interest, resources and compel a virtuous cycle to amplify the science and the enable bigger and better projects.

Which brings me back to the 720 eggs video and, for that matter, the famous Oreo versus Statin experiment. These very individual, very human n = 1 metabolic demonstrations or “stunts” have gotten much more attention than our other works.

• For example, the 720 egg video dropped shortly after our publication of the Lean Mass Hyper-Responder Match analysis in JACC Advances, showing no increase in coronary plaque in the Lean Mass Hyper-Responder group as compared to matched controls and no association between LDL cholesterol and plaque. The latter was more important. The former got more attention.

• Or, previously, with the Oreo versus Statin n = 1 versus our meta-analysis of 41 randomized controlled trials, a project spearheaded by my colleague Professor Adrian Soto Mota MD PhD. Again, the latter was more important. The former got more attention.

So, what do I do with this reality: stunts and legit bait get more attention given the incentive structure of the media? But what I really want is for people to engage with our research!

In my mind, the solution is to use the stunts to amplify and call back to the research: they can serve as hooks, to draw people in… get a foot in the door… provoke curiosity. And then…

WHAAAM! Hit them with nuance!

You see my point?

There can be a synergy, whereby the research reveals physiological principles and ideas that lay the groundwork for the provocative n = 1 stunts, that then call back to the research? The cycle garners attention, and resources (in the form of partnerships and funding), and we move forward, faster and more efficiently.  

So, what’s to come… Well, more N = 1! And, as a tease, I won’t be doing this alone…

Other content from the Week

Metabolic Mind Just Dropped an Interview with Dave Feldman and Myself on the Lean Mass Hyper-Responder Coronary CT Angiography study Match Analysis. Dr Bret Scher is always an excellent host, and if you have 42 minutes, check it out: