Poor nutrition is now the leading preventable risk factor behind the global rise in non-communicable diseases (NCDs). And yet, research shows that the vast majority of Americans do not meet national dietary guidelines and a similar picture is emerging in the UK, where 64% of adults were classified as overweight or obese in 2022. A growing body of research has explored the scale and spread of nutrition misinformation online, focusing primarily on the volume, content type and engagement metrics. Very few studies have interrogated the “who”, “where” and “why” behind it. In other words, little attention has been paid to the people driving this misinformation: their motivations, methods and the narratives they employ to gain trust and influence. Understanding these dynamics is important. It can inform the development of more effective tools and communication strategies that reduce harm and build public trust. It can also reshape how nutrition is communicated, making it more inclusive and responsive to people’s needs.
Our research identified 53 super-spreaders of nutrition misinformation whose accounts collectively reach over 24 million followers – although there may be overlap among audiences, the scale of their influence is undeniable. We found that these individuals fall broadly into three categories: The Doc, who uses real or fabricated medical titles to project authority; The Rebel, who pushes anti-establishment and conspiratorial views with cult-like conviction; and The Hustler, who wraps false health claims in persuasive marketing to sell products or programmes. Although only a few had formal nutrition or medical credentials, many positioned themselves as doctors. This blurring of credibility lines is particularly troubling given the alignment between these profiles and high-performing misinformation content.
The most prevalent misinformation themes promoted by these accounts included carnivore and meat-based diets, general wellness misinformation and low-carb or ketogenic eating. Over 90% of the super-spreaders promoted multiple overlapping narratives, such as seed oil conspiracies and anti-plant-based rhetoric, creating a concoction of misleading claims. Moreover, 96% of them exhibited clear financial incentives tied to their messaging.
We also identified three core dissemination strategies: fear-mongering, joy-mongering and sprinkling. Fear-mongering accounts stoke alarmism and distrust in institutions, particularly around plant-based eating and seed oils, while promoting animal-based diets as a “truth-telling” alternative. Interestingly, the most liked post in our entire dataset (with over 3.7 million likes) was an anti-plant-based, pro-carnivore post from a fear-monger account. In contrast, joy-mongering accounts offer hopeful, emotionally-charged messages tied to personal transformation, such as “before and after” narratives, recipes and wellness advice framed around restrictive diets. Sprinkler accounts embed misinformation in broader lifestyle content, making it harder to detect and easier to digest. These strategies share a common emotional appeal, whether rooted in fear, hope or inspiration.
Super-spreaders build trust by connecting with audiences emotionally, rather than by overwhelming them with data. They position themselves as relatable truth-tellers who challenge corrupt institutions and offer simple, “empowering” solutions. Through personal anecdotes and motivational, accessible language, they create an “us vs. them” narrative in which misinformation becomes a form of liberation. Many frame their dietary advice as part of a broader movement, towards healing, strength, clarity, masculinity/femininity or even revolution. “Natural” or “traditional” diets (e.g. those relying heavily on animal-based foods or that exclude modern-day solutions to complex health problems. This combination of emotional resonance and charismatic storytelling helps explain why such misinformation is so persuasive.
Leave a Reply