Was just trying to see exactly who the “Peter Attia Medical Group / Early Medical” team consists of. Its not listed on any of his websites, so I went to linked in. It seems he has a pretty good depth of team that is gathering and sorting through longevity information and research; so I think that may make him unique in this market. Its one thing to have a doctor who reads the literature when he has time, its a whole different level to have a team finding and sumarizing the latest research and translating it into clinical recommendations…
Here are the people I could find from a quick search, over 22 employees, which makes it a nice small business:
Bob Kaplan’s profile just says “Researcher, writer”. No claim to medical or allied medical training. Can’t access the rest, because I have no linkedin account.
Seems to be a bunch of readers. That should qualify all of us, as well, if we were managed by an MD. So the Peter Attia Medical Group is not all MDs, which was my personal misconception.
As I posted above, he trained five years as a general surgeon, then two years as an oncological surgeon. Then he joined McKinsey consulting. So, that is seven years of practice of surgery. My GP has been practicing internal medicine for more than 33 years. We have a member here who has been practicing internal medicine for more than 40 years. I’d rather consult my GP, or our member here.
What was that old joke again? The internist knows everything, but does nothing. The surgeon does everything, but knows nothing. The pathologist knows everything and does everything, but it is too late.
“He would also leverage the large network that he had cultivated during this period to found a concierge medical practice that promoted itself as the cutting edge of medical knowledge, as well as launch a podcast that gives guests a platform to promote a dizzying array of trendy but similarly unsupported medical theories.”
I think the article you reference should be required reading to debunk the continued unsupported claims made by Peter Attia and other popular medical gurus.
I think it is important to read the entire article.
Reminding us all to take with a grain of salt anything popular medical gurus are saying.
He was doing a seven year residency training at John Hopkins., quit{medicine two year before finishing the residency] Went to Palo Alto California, got a job at McKenzie as a consultant {details are in his book] Then left McKenzie and started “Medical 3.0”
Just put his name or any of the other names I have mentioned into the search at the top of the page. This has been widely discussed on the forum. Make up your own mind.
Same here. When I first stared to be interested in longevity was, when I lost my kindle and my friend had Sinclair’s book, she finished reading and I read it. Then Peter Attia came to my you tube videos and I watched quite a lot of them and later Brad Stanfield’s videos came to my youtube. My husband MD was allways joking and called both broscientist. The more I read, the more I was not trusting what they were saying or there was enough doubt to look elsewhere. From all three the David Sinclair is the only scientist, the Attia and Stanfield are practicing doctors with limited experience in science other than they read a lot of articles. Attia is a bit more convincing, but Stanfield I noticed is full of bullshit and his opinion changes as much as the YouTube audience and comments. All three primarily take care of their own pockets and became money machines. They all show narcissistic tendencies and are more interested in being stars and admired. I wont go deeper as probably without meeting them in person that would not be ethical but their public personas are not really trustworthy. They sound trustworthy but when you try to get the facts together they don’t add up.
I like Stanfield, and i think he’s doing the best he knows how to do. Changing opinions based on evidence is a strength, not a weakness. Stubbornly sticking to the same line despite new and contrary evidence would be letting pride and emotions win over rational thinking. And all the ad hominem/personal attacks on Stanfield/Attia (rather than specifically addressing any particular things they’ve said which you may or may not agreee with) is pretty unethical, IMO.
Brad Stanfield has finished medical school in 2015, he is currently training to become a General Practitioner so in other words if you are familiar with becoming a medical doctor he is not yet a real practicing doctor! He has just finished his degree probably got his basic license that allows him to practice urgent medicine on his own but nothing else.
Actually, Dr. Stanfield has been a General Practitioner for the past two years. He just failed to update his LinkedIn Intro. He’s been a real doctor for most of his previous videos. While I don’t agree with everything he says, he does provide research to back up his claims. Therefore, he’s more of a health news reporter than a scientist. I do hope he gets his human Rapamycin trial that he’s been working on with Matt Kaberlein started though. He’s the only one trying to do a human Rapamycin trial.
Not a big difference there, he might just be a young GP starting his medical career. But looking at his linkedin I would not be able to confirm this as he was previously orthopedic resident and did not state any GP training which takes at least three years. So it does not add up… I believe the training status is correct. He just works in GP practice since 2021. He is not listed on their page as GP. So I gather he must still be in training.
The news reporter is something I agree. He just reports (albeit something also really wrongly) medical news. He sometimes repeats the wrong interpretations of some studies and when his statements are rebuffed he just deletes his videos. But don’t get me wrong I think he is trying his best, for the moment it seems he is an one man band and yes, I wish he would devote more time to medicine practicing or science research to become or a good practitioner or scholar. Now he is neither. I guess there are more people here on this forum doing much better job at understanding subjects he is talking about. He just built himself a platform that reaches more people. Which probably confirms my previous statement that he is more interested in become famous than anything else.
But this seems to come across really wrongly. I have nothing against Brad Stanfield, I was just trying to make a dent into his public persona, to see beyond and reasonably doubt information he is giving…
