Every month, paid subscribers can participate in an Ask Me Anything and the study I’m writing about today was brought to my attention during the June AMA. It is, if not the worst, one of the top 3 worst studies I have ever analyzed so strap in because we are going for an EPIC ride.

Some of you may know that I’m a Board Certified Patient Advocate. I don’t currently do a lot of individual advocacy because my speaking schedule doesn’t allow for the necessary time availability so I typically either work on complex or emergency cases, or on cases that are not strictly timebound - most of these are people who are dealing with a BMI-based denial of care, meaning that their healthcare is being held hostage for a weight loss ransom. This is one of those situations and I am, as always, sharing this story with permission and anonymously by request.

In part 1 we began discussing the study ““Please step on the scale”: The experience of being weighed promotes sustained systolic blood pressure level” by Incollingo Rodriguez, Nunes, & Kirschner, published in 2026 in the Stigma and Health Journal.

The study sought to determine the impact of weighing in a medical appointments on blood pressure, cortisol, and perceived stress. In part 1 we looked at the participants, the intervention, and the baseline findings. In part 2 we’ll consider the limitations, recommendations, and conclusions.

I recently spoke at the Association for Weight and Size Inclusive Medicine’s Spring Scientific Assembly. Speakers were grouped into blocks and this study was presented by the lead author, Angela C. Icollingo Rodriguez in the same block as me and I think it’s an important area of study.

I’ve received a bunch of reader questions that can be summarized as what the hell is going on with GLP-1s and Medicare?

In Part 1 we talked about the basics of the studies around GLP-1s and cancer. In part 2 we looked at a study of relatively early data around breast cancer. In part 3 we began discussing a Guardian article that made broad, unsubstantiated claims about these drugs and cancer. Today, in the final part of this series, we’ll take a look at the three studies the Guardian author quotes.

In part 1 we discussed the basics around the current studies considering possible impacts of GLP-1s on cancer (if you haven’t read part 1 yet you might want to as I will refer to the things discussed in that post.) In part 2 we looked at a study that explored correlation between GLP-1 use and cis women with breast cancer. Today we’re going to look at a Guardian Article that many of you asked me to discuss.

In part 1 I discussed the basics of the deluge of studies coming out looking at GLP-1s and cancer. If you haven’t read part 1 yet, I would recommend doing so as I’ll be referring to it a lot as I move through the rest of this series.

Today we’re going to look at a study that considers relatively earlier data around GLP-1s and breast cancer.

In Part 1 we looked at a study that questions common assumptions about weight and health. Today the lead author, Natasha Wiebe will share her reflections on her attendance and presentation of the paper at the Ob*sity Summit in Montreal, Quebec.

I’ve previously written about research from Natasha Wiebe et al. that questions assumptions around weight and health. Today I’m back to discuss a new study “Associations of ob*sity, systemic inflammation, and hyperinsulinemia with the incidence of non-communicable chronic disease and mortality: A prospective cohort study” by Natasha Wiebe MMath, Stephanie Thompson MD, Peter Stenvinkel MD, Aminu Bello MD, Matthew T. James MD, and Marcello Tonelli MD.

In part 1 we’ll discuss the study. In part 2 I’ll publish a piece written by Natasha about her experience attending a weight loss industry event to present her findings.