I judge my weekly meetings with clients and colleagues as a barometer of where the industry is. What is capturing people’s attention. And how do trends differ between US and European clients.
A quick sample of the last week has consisted of the following:
- Where would you recommend getting an IV vitamin Drip?
- Do we need a hyperbaric chamber?
- Here are my blood results (which on closer inspection, had no validation or medical oversight)
And finally, and the most problematic, this from a new client:
- I have more health data on myself than ever, yet I’ve never been so confused about how to exercise, eat, and recover(!)
These are some examples. I could go on. And on.
We are now approaching ‘peak grift‘ as wellness has become fashionable: post-workout shakes are status signallers, biomarkers are now firmly part of work and dating conversations.
Influencers are using a wide range of tactics, all competing for their piece of the ~$1.8 trillion global consumer wellness market, and ‘noise’ can help to sell products.
As I mentioned in my book, I always encourage those around me to be critical of the wider wellness/health/performance industry and take nothing at face value.
But here’s the thing: it really is becoming more difficult to tell the ‘signal from the noise’ (domain expertise from the gurus).
In recent years we’ve seen the emergence of different types of gurus:
- An Insta-expert with an impressive sounding (but unrecognised) qualification
- A wellness practitioner who deliberately overcomplicates (adding ‘bio-’ or ‘neuro-’ to each statement)
- The ‘biohacker’ or similar who has collected huge volumes of data on themselves (n=1), but with no qualifications or registration
- An influencer who doesn’t declare their conflicts of interest when promoting their product
- Even a brand positioning their product as the sole remedy for your ‘brain fog’ or fatigue?
Now, don’t get me wrong – it’s great to see people more interested in wellness and understanding their body – but gut-wrenching when people think they’re dialling in domain expertise to help them reach their goals, when in fact it’s a guru using them as a cash cow.
Trust the process?
My group is witnessing an increase in the ‘second wave’ of clients who have unfortunately been burned the first time round from a case of ‘the grift’- sold a solution or programme of support which left them injured, fatigued, confused, and back where they started.
I’ve also heard examples of high performers using two doctors, to conduct two separate sets of biomarkers to compare, just to avoid putting their trust in one expert.
The psychological scar tissue from the grift can be difficult to unpick and rebuild trust.
Like most market forces, I believe we’ll see a market correction – and a reliance on true expertise over fashionable products and services.
Until then, I advise anyone to take time to do their own due diligence on a health or human performance specialist or product. It’s wild out there!
Is anyone else seeing the grift in different forms?
