Sigma Nutrition Radio

When considering the health impact of foods, it is important to consider "compared to what?". Increasing the amount of a certain food or nutrient in the diet, typically implies a displacement of another.
While comparisons are more obvious in trials, in epidemiology food substitution models can be useful to help us determine the health effects of increasing/decreasing intake of a food, food group or nutrient.
However, these models are often misinterpreted and miscommunicated as if they are a game of "rock, paper, scissors", where one food beats another, and the losing food must be removed from the diet or considered harmful to health.
In this episode we discuss the problem of treating substitution analyses as food-ranking contests, rather than context-dependent comparisons shaped by the comparator, the unit of substitution, the baseline diet, and the outcome being studied.
Timestamps:

[01:30] Misuse of "compared to what?"
[06:39] What substitution models do
[10:43] Specified vs unspecified substitution
[16:57] Why the units used matter
[26:45] Example: organic vs conventional produce
[31:22] When substitutions are useful
[34:35] If legumes beat fish, does that mean fish intake should be zero?
[44:31] Naive vs bias-adjusted: artificial sweeteners case study
[49:14] Checklist: how to interpret food substitution analyses
Links:
Go to episode page (all study references linked)
Join the Sigma newsletter for free
Subscribe to Sigma Nutrition Premium
Subscribe to Alinea Nutrition Education Hub
Enroll in the next cohort of our Applied Nutrition Literacy course
Episode #472: Compared To What?
Episode #589: Causal Inference in Nutrition Science – Daniel Ibsen, PhD

Unprocessed red meat and cancer risk remains one of the most debated topics in nutrition science, partly because the evidence is often presented in overly simplistic terms.
The key question is not whether to adopt a vague "balanced" position on red meat, but whether the evidence clearly identifies intake levels at which colorectal cancer risk increases and whether controlled human trials support plausible mechanisms for that risk.
A second issue is whether claims that fibre, vegetables, or an otherwise "healthy diet" can neutralise high red meat intake are actually supported by the mechanistic evidence, or whether they overstate what dietary context can plausibly offset.
In this episode, Danny and Alan examine the evidence base by moving beyond the usual epidemiology-only debate. They discuss why regional intake patterns and dose thresholds matter, then explore controlled human feeding studies showing how higher red meat intake can increase endogenous N-nitroso compound formation, faecal water genotoxicity, and other mechanistic biomarkers linked to colorectal carcinogenesis.
Timestamps:

[01:11] Defining the exposure and outcome
[02:34] Carcinogen labels explained
[07:54] Epidemiology and dose thresholds
[14:04] Interpreting null findings
[19:09] Bingham 1996 nitroso study
[25:20] Hughes dose response trial
[33:49] Cross 2003 heme iron mechanism
[42:55] Fecal water genotoxicity
[55:42] Tumor mutational signatures
[59:38] What we can conclude now
[01:04:10] Practical intake recommendations
[01:08:41] Key ideas segment (premium-only)
Links:
Go to episode page (includes links to studies mentioned)
Subscribe to Sigma Nutrition Premium
Join the Sigma newsletter for free
Enroll in the next cohort of our Applied Nutrition Literacy course

Performance nutrition in elite sport is often discussed in terms of meal plans, supplements, and macronutrient targets. However, effective practice in professional environments depends just as much on education, trust, communication, and the ability to translate scientific principles into decisions athletes can act on under real-world constraints.
In this episode, Dr James Morehen discusses his work across elite rugby, football, and combat sports, with particular attention to the demands of professional rugby. The conversation explores how practitioners support athletes in a high-impact collision sport, including fuelling for training and match play, managing body composition without reducing athletes to arbitrary numbers, addressing recovery from muscle damage and injury, and developing practical systems around game-day nutrition.
The episode also provides insight into the realities of building a career in performance nutrition, including the importance of applied experience, interdisciplinary collaboration, and learning how to coach athletes rather than simply prescribe to them.
Timestamps:

[03:31] Interview starts
[10:26] Educating athletes on nutrition
[13:55] Breaking into elite sport
[26:26] Physiological demands of rugby
[30:53] Energy needs and timing
[38:28] Body composition measurements: utility?
[46:16] Game day fuelling strategy
[01:07:09] Key ideas (premium-only)
Links:
Go to episode page
Join the Sigma newsletter for free
Subscribe to Sigma Nutrition Premium
Enroll in the next cohort of our Applied Nutrition Literacy course
James' Instagram: @morehenperformance
James' LinkedIn: Dr. James Morehen
Related episodes: #573: A Philosophy of Elite Performance Nutrition – Daniel Davey
#286: Fuelling Elite Sport – James Morton, PhD
#506: Sports Nutrition: Translating Research to Practice – Andreas Kasper, PhD

Gut health has become a major focus in nutrition, medicine, and consumer wellness, but the term is often used loosely. Claims about microbiome testing, probiotics, fermented foods, fibre, and "boosting" the gut microbiome are now common, yet the evidence behind these claims varies substantially.
In this episode, Dr. Emily Leeming examines what gut health actually refers to, why it cannot be reduced to the microbiome alone, and where current microbiome science is being applied before it is ready. The discussion covers the limits of commercial stool testing, the difficulty of defining a healthy microbiome, and the practical strategies most strongly supported by current evidence.
Timestamps:

[02:48] Interview start
[04:17] Defining gut health
[09:03] What is a "healthy microbiome"?
[15:25] Microbiome testing - any clinical utility?
[24:08] Interpreting microbiome studies
[34:39] "30 plants a week" is not evidence-based
[39:53] Serotonin and gut brain
[45:34] Fiber research frontier
Links/Resources:
Go to episode page (w/ links to mentioned studies)
Join the Sigma newsletter for free
Subscribe to Sigma Nutrition Premium
Enroll in the next cohort of our Applied Nutrition Literacy course
Dr. Leeming's newsletter: Second Brain

In this episode, we examine what nutrition can realistically do in the condition historically known as PCOS, now renamed polyendocrine metabolic ovarian syndrome, or PMOS.
We begin by explaining why the name change matters: the condition is not defined by ovarian cysts, but is better understood as a broader endocrine-metabolic and ovarian syndrome involving insulin resistance, androgen excess, ovulatory dysfunction, metabolic risk, and psychological burden.
We then assess the nutrition evidence, including energy restriction, weight loss, carbohydrate quality, glycaemic index and load, protein intake, fat quality, appetite regulation, fertility outcomes, and phenotype differences. Rather than seeking a single "PCOS diet", the episode asks which dietary features may plausibly help, how strong the evidence is, and where uncertainty remains.
This is a Premium-exclusive episode. To listen to the full episode, subscribe to Premium.





Links: 
Go to episode page and resources
Subscribe to Sigma Nutrition Premium
Join the Sigma newsletter for free