Why do some foods feel difficult to stop eating, while others can be highly enjoyable without prompting the same tendency to overconsume? Answering this requires a clearer understanding of food reward, including the distinction between liking a food, wanting it, and perceiving it as easy to overeat.

In this episode, we examine how nutritional composition, sensory characteristics, learned beliefs and the eating context may shape hedonic overeating. It also considers the limits of using broad food categories to explain complex eating behaviour.

Discussing all this is Professor Graham Finlayson, professor of Psychobiology at the University of Leeds, whose research focuses on human appetite, food reward and the psychological processes involved in eating behaviour and weight control.

• [04:02] Prof. Finlayson's research
• [06:06] Food reward
• [07:13] Liking versus wanting
• [12:43] Measuring wanting in research
• [15:27] Does wanting predict overeating?
• [16:36] Study on hedonic overeating
• [23:19] Perception and context effects
• [26:24] Does ultra processing classification add anything?
• [36:09] Key takeaways and future work
• [40:35] Premium key ideas

• Go to episode page
• Subscribe to Sigma Nutrition Premium
• Join the Sigma newsletter for free
• Enroll in the next cohort of our Applied Nutrition Literacy course
• Study: Finlayson et al., 2025 – Food-level predictors of self-reported liking and hedonic overeating: Putting ultra-processed foods in context

Commonly people are talking about "peptides" to refer to a heterogeneous group of peptide medications or investigational compounds. These are increasingly promoted for injury recovery, tissue repair, performance and longevity, with BPC-157 attracting particular attention.

But what evidence supports the claims made about these compounds? How should animal studies, biological mechanisms and personal anecdotes be interpreted? What is currently known about their safety? And what do recent regulatory discussions actually mean for their medical status and availability?

In this episode, physician and Barbell Medicine founder Dr. Jordan Feigenbaum examines the evidence surrounding BPC-157 and other peptide medications, alongside the wider questions of risk, access and informed decision-making.

• [00:13] What we want to address

• [04:47] Interview start

• [05:29] What do we mean by "peptides"?

• [10:32] BPC-157 evidence

• [16:49] Sourcing of peptides

• [20:19] The gray zone of pro-peptide communication

• [24:16] Risk sourcing vs drug effects

• [26:25] FDA lists and compounding

• [31:05] Risk tolerance and informed consent

• [43:02] Why did pharma abandon peptide research?

• [47:44] Harm reduction debate

• [51:48] Practical takeaways

• [56:20] Key Ideas segment (Premium members only)

• 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
• Barbell Medicine
• Instagram: jordan_barbellmedicine
• Book: Signal: What Testosterone Levels Are Telling You About Your Health
• Related episode: #524: Strength & Fitness Levels for Reducing Chronic Disease Risk & Promoting Health Ageing – Jordan Feigenbaum, MD
• Further reading:
  • Emerging use of BPC-157 in orthopaedic sports medicine: a systematic review. 2025.
  • Ruenzi M, Stolte M, Veljaca M, et al. Efficacy and safety of PL 14736 (BPC 157) in patients with active ulcerative colitis. Gastroenterology. 2005. Meeting abstract; full study not published.

Most dietary guidelines recommend eating one to two servings of fish per week, often specifying that at least one serving should be oily fish. But how directly is that recommendation supported by evidence? And does adding fish to the diet improve outcomes?

This episode examines where current fish-intake recommendations originated, why findings may appear contradictory, and what substitution analyses can tell us about replacing fish with alternative options.

It also considers evidence from pescatarian and vegetarian cohorts, including whether adding fish would improve an already high-quality diet and whether removing it from a plant-forward diet is likely to provide further benefit.

• [00:20] Setting out the question at hand

• [03:26] Overview of typical fish intake recommendations

• [07:10] Is there good evidence for suggested intakes?

• [08:10] Historical context

• [13:22] Key evidence: DART trial and cohort data

• [19:27] Analysis from Mohan et al.

• [25:04] Comparator issue: what is fish replacing?

• [30:52] Fish protein vs. plant protein

• [44:29] Vegetarian vs. pescatarian cohorts

• [55:20] Conclusions

• [01:00:50] Key Ideas segment (Premium-only)

• Go to episode page (with full study reference list)
• Join the Sigma newsletter for free
• Subscribe to Sigma Nutrition Premium
• Subscribe to Alan's Alinea Nutrition Education Hub
• Enroll in the next cohort of our Applied Nutrition Literacy course