A recent wave of marketing has seen the term ‘personalised nutrition’ become overused, detracting from it’s true meaning and associating it with misleading claims and misinformation. 

People are spending huge amounts of money on the belief that they are obtaining advice that’s completely unique to them when in reality, the science behind the claims just isn’t there.

What people receive instead is advice that boils down to an improvement in dietary quality - more protein, fruit and veg; some healthy fats; and less processed foods.  Included with that is often a smattering of foods to avoid (based on either poor quality science and/or misinterpretation of data), and a resulting disordered relationship with certain foods that saps the life, soul and joy out of their diet and social life.

 What personalised nutrition isn’t

There is not good evidence for this:

• Blood tests other than for lactose and coeliac

• Glucose monitoring other than for diagnosed diabetics

• DNA or ‘gut microbiome’ testing

• Fear based strategies

What personalised nutrition is

There is good evidence for this:

• Programming that is periodised to sports, performance, and body composition goals

• Tailored to encompass personal likes, dislikes, and lifestyle

• Modified to individuals in order to address clinical factors such as diabetes, high cholesterol, blood pressure, and menstrual and reproductive function.

The science behind blood/stool/saliva/[enter bodily fluid or tissue of your choice here] for personalised nutrition just isn't there yet. When it is, and is robust and reliable, then that will be an exciting time for us all and could potentially revolutionise health and nutrition.

But for now, evidence-based strategies for personalised nutrition are as outlined above. They don't require your commitment to expensive subscriptions, or for you to offer up samples of any kind.