Home / Episodes / Episode 1393

Episode 1393: James Wilks & Chris Kresser

nutrition veganism pseudoscience diet

Episode 1393: James Wilks & Chris Kresser - The Game Changers Debate

TL;DR: A four-hour “debate” over the Netflix vegan-advocacy documentary The Game Changers that platformed cherry-picked nutrition claims, devolved into appeals to authority, and saw Rogan abandon the moderator role for a guest he openly favored.

The episode pits James Wilks (retired MMA fighter and producer of The Game Changers) against Chris Kresser (functional medicine practitioner who had previously appeared on JRE #1392 to critique the film). The format was structured as a live debate without the ability to read source studies in real time, which both participants later acknowledged was a problem.

The result was a viral marathon episode that misled millions of viewers about diet, animal protein, and athletic performance.

Why This Episode Is Problematic

  • The Game Changers documentary has been widely criticized by nutrition scientists for cherry-picking small studies and overstating conclusions.
  • The debate format incentivized rapid-fire citation dumping rather than evidence quality.
  • Neither participant is a credentialed nutrition researcher; Wilks is a filmmaker/MMA coach, and Kresser is a functional medicine practitioner whose credentials have themselves been criticized.
  • Rogan, as host, repeatedly sided with Wilks and failed to moderate fairly.
  • Millions of viewers walked away with hardened beliefs based on disputed science rather than a clearer picture of nutritional evidence.

Key Disputed Claims From The Game Changers

Claim 1: Humans historically got adequate B12 from unwashed produce and water

“Bacteria in soil and water provided humans with enough B12 without animal foods.”

What the evidence says:

  • Kresser’s rebuttal: The Iranian study Wilks cited (showing adequate B12 in vegetarians eating unwashed produce) used “night soil” - human excrement - as fertilizer. The B12 came from human waste contamination, not naturally occurring soil bacteria. Source
  • NIH: B12 deficiency is well documented among strict vegans and is the reason fortified foods and supplements are recommended. NIH Office of Dietary Supplements

Claim 2: Animal protein is inferior to plant protein for athletic performance

What the evidence says:

  • Healthline review (2019): “The science is not quite as black and white as the film makes it appear, and some contentions in the film are simply not true.” Healthline
  • Layne Norton, PhD (Nutritional Sciences): The film overstates effects of small observational studies and ignores the broader body of literature on protein quality and leucine content favoring animal sources for muscle protein synthesis. Biolayne analysis
  • Stuart Phillips, PhD (McMaster University, leading protein researcher): Animal proteins remain superior on a per-gram basis for muscle protein synthesis due to amino acid profile and digestibility, though plant proteins can be adequate with sufficient volume and variety.

Claim 3: A single beef burrito caused arterial inflammation in athletes (the “cloudy plasma” demo)

What the evidence says:

  • The blood plasma demonstration shown in the film has no peer-reviewed publication or controlled methodology.
  • Post-prandial lipemia (cloudy blood plasma after a fatty meal) is normal physiology, not evidence of inflammation or vascular damage.
  • BTN Academy review: “Riddled with scientific inaccuracy” - the cloudy plasma scene confuses normal post-meal triglyceride elevation with pathology. BTN Academy

Claim 4: Plant-based diets dramatically improve erectile function

What the evidence says:

  • The film’s “boner study” involved only 10 men, was unpublished, and used a single meal comparison rather than long-term diet effects.
  • N=10 with no control for confounders cannot support the broad claims made in the film.
  • Multiple reviewers including Layne Norton and the Hunter & Gather analysis flagged this as a textbook example of overinterpreting underpowered research. Hunter & Gather Foods

Claim 5: Gladiators were vegetarian based on bone isotope analysis

What the evidence says:

  • The original Austrian study showed gladiators ate a grain-heavy diet, but the authors did not conclude they were vegetarian or that this was optimal.
  • Gladiators were also notably overweight (a layer of fat was protective in combat), undermining the “plant-based for performance” framing.
  • The film selectively cites the study while omitting the researchers’ own caveats.

Joe Rogan’s Role

This is the episode where Rogan’s moderation failed in documented ways:

  • Sided openly with Wilks. Rogan repeatedly expressed enthusiasm for Game Changers claims, framing Wilks as the underdog “truth teller” against the establishment.
  • Did not enforce evidence standards. When Wilks dumped study citations rapidly, Rogan did not press for context, sample sizes, or study quality.
  • Allowed appeals to authority to substitute for evidence. Both Kresser and Wilks reported the debate degenerated into credential-checking; Rogan let it.
  • Platformed without correction. Rogan had previously hosted Kresser solo (#1392) and now hosted Wilks with Kresser, but framed the matchup as gladiatorial entertainment rather than an attempt at scientific clarity.
  • No follow-up correction. Even after the debate’s flaws were publicly documented by Layne Norton, Stuart Phillips, and others, Rogan never aired a corrective episode.

Real-World Harm

  • Mass audience reach: The episode has tens of millions of views on YouTube alone and is regularly cited as “settling” the vegan debate.
  • Misinformation amplification: Viewers were left believing animal protein is inferior, dairy causes cancer, and a single meal damages arteries - claims that range from oversimplified to false.
  • Erosion of nutrition science literacy: The format taught viewers that nutrition is “whoever cites the most studies wins” rather than evaluating evidence quality, study design, and totality of literature.
  • Supplement and diet industry profit: Both sides of the debate sell products and programs that benefit from polarized diet tribalism.

Bottom Line

JRE #1393 is not problematic because veganism is wrong or because animal protein is uniquely virtuous. It is problematic because Rogan platformed a four-hour debate between two non-researchers, allowed cherry-picked science to flow uncorrected, and used his enormous audience to amplify a documentary that mainstream nutrition scientists had already flagged as misleading.

A responsible host would have brought in actual protein researchers (Stuart Phillips, Luc van Loon) or epidemiologists rather than a filmmaker and a functional medicine practitioner. Rogan chose spectacle.

Sources

Previous critique #1391: Tulsi Gabbard & Jocko Willink All Episodes Next critique #1412: Jimmy Dore