Conspirituality - Episode Brief: MAHA’s Conspiracy Theories

Podcast Date: September 13, 2025
Hosts: Derek Beres (primarily)
Episode Theme:
This episode delves into the process and findings behind a New York Times Opinion video, co-produced by Derek Beres, investigating how wellness and New Age ("MAHA" - Make America Healthy Again) influencers radicalize health-conscious individuals into anti-medicine, anti-doctor conspiracy thinking.
The conversation provides critical reflection on the influencer ecosystem, media responsibility, and the difference between journalistic investigation and unaccountable content creation.

Episode Overview

Derek Beres, Conspirituality co-host, shares the backstory and implications of participating in the New York Times’ deep-dive into conspirituality and the MAHA media ecosystem—an ecosystem increasingly influencing public discourse, health behaviors, and even government policy. He walks the listener through the meticulous journalistic process contrasted with influencer-driven content, exploring why MAHA's conspiracy-driven messaging is so effective and dangerous.

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. The NYT Video Project — Genesis and Goals

• The New York Times Opinion team, with Beres and editor Alex Stockton, spent a year researching the journey into MAHA conspiracy theories and content.
  • Quote (Derek Beres, 02:00):
    "The premise was to show how people get radicalized by wellness influencers in the MAHA sphere... and they share an ideology with Kennedy."
• The investigation analyzed nearly 12,000 pieces of content by prominent influencers connected to MAHA and RFK Jr.
  • Quote (Stockton, 01:15, quoted by Beres):
    "We found that this content can act like a funnel, turning health conscious people against health care."

2. Journalistic Rigorousness vs. Influencer Content

• New York Times required dozens of edits, rounds of legal review, and meticulous fact-checking for every sentence.
  • Quote (Beres, 06:10):
    "Every sentence was vetted, fact checked and signed off on before being recorded... This is important because most of the content churned out by the influencers we cover... have no oversight whatsoever."
• Contrasted with influencers like Mark Hyman and Dave Asprey, who make health claims without accountability.
  • Quote (Beres, 07:20):
    "For example, Hyman goes on Barry Weiss's podcast to claim that vaccines are not studied against placebos, which he said. Or... says that upwards of 90% of all disease is caused by leaky gut... and suffers no repercussions for saying these things."

3. The Harmful Messaging — Anti-Medicine, Anti-Doctor Propaganda

• The investigation found nearly 800 instances of influencers explicitly or implicitly encouraging distrust in doctors and the healthcare system.
  • Quote (Beres, 09:00):
    "We found nearly 800 instances of influencers telling people not to trust their doctor or the healthcare system... or saying that medical professionals or the system are trying to purposefully harm you."
  • Example: RFK Jr. saying, "the system doesn't want kids dead, but they want them sick so that they're lifelong clients." (09:40)
• Critique: Romanticizes a past where "humans were all just magically naturally healthy," which is historically and anthropologically false.

4. Selling the Cure and the Problem

• Influencers manufacture or exaggerate health threats, then monetize solutions through branded products and coaching.
  • Quote (Beres, 09:55):
    "Both men then turn their pseudoscientific paranoia into marketing funnels to their many companies and products that magically counteract all the problems that they just invented."

5. Influencer Deflection and Media Manipulation

• When criticized, major figures (Cali Means, Jillian Michaels) deflect, claiming media conspiracies and smear campaigns instead of addressing specific findings.

  • Quote (Cali Means, paraphrased by Beres, 14:30):
    "'There is a coordinated campaign from the media... that profits from this fact to convince Americans that anyone who criticizes this system is a dangerous anti vaxxer.' It's just pure deflection."
  • Jillian Michaels tweets, initially lauding the Times for "an honest, balanced portrayal," then calling later coverage "a blatant hit piece" (16:00–17:10).
    • Quote (Michaels, via tweet, 16:45):
      "Why would anyone be so intent on trashing those of us asking why America can't take its chronic disease crisis seriously and put on prevention?"

• Beres points out the tactic:

  • Quote (Beres, 18:15):
    "Everything Cali and Jillian says here is pure deflection. They do not actually focus on the criticism... This is a very common influencer technique... if you don't want to actually own up to the words that you've said, that's a big red flag, especially if these are people who are selling you things."

6. Media Literacy and the Importance of Distinctions

• Explains public confusion between opinion and editorial journalism, and why this distinction matters for understanding what counts as fact versus commentary.
  • Quote (Beres, 19:55):
    "There is the editorial reporting side and then there is the opinion side. And there is generally a firewall between them... It has gotten very flattened because of the social media environment that we all operate in."
• Criticizes flattening of media and influencer-driven collapse of nuance.

7. The Value and Fragility of Investigative Journalism

• Details the substantial time, labor, and cost involved in the Times’ investigative process versus influencer content creation.
  • Quote (Beres, 12:40):
    "I'm going to guess there were hundreds of hours of labor put in by over a dozen people at a cost that I'm also going to guess stretched it into six figures. And this is all done for one piece of reporting..."
• Expresses hope regarding ongoing institutional editorial standards, but concern for journalism’s future amid societal fragmentation and billionaire media ownership.

Memorable Quotes & Moments (with Timestamps)

• On MAHA’s funnel and AI analysis
  "We used AI to find patterns in about 12,000 videos and podcasts. We found that this content can act like a funnel, turning health conscious people against health care."
  — Alex Stockton (quoted), 01:40

• On influencer accountability:
  "For example, Hyman goes on Barry Weiss's podcast to claim that vaccines are not studied against placebos, which he said. Or... says that upwards of 90% of all disease is caused by leaky gut... and suffers no repercussions for saying these things."
  — Derek Beres, 07:20

• On the nature of health influencer grifting:
  "Both men then turn their pseudoscientific paranoia into marketing funnels to their many companies and products that magically counteract all the problems that they just invented."
  — Derek Beres, 09:55

• On deflection and media manipulation:
  "Everything Cali and Jillian says here is pure deflection. They do not actually focus on the criticism... if you don't want to actually own up to the words that you've said, that's a big red flag, especially if these are people who are selling you things."
  — Derek Beres, 18:15

• On the value of showing your work:
  "Showing your work is an essential part of the job of journalism. It makes sense that the feedback from those influencers doesn't address our claims because they can't show the work refuting what we found."
  — Derek Beres, 23:40

Notable Segment Timestamps

• 01:00–02:00:
  Introduction to NYT video project and use of AI in analysis.
• 06:00–09:00:
  Contrasts between journalistic rigor and influencer content; examples from Hyman and Asprey.
• 09:00–12:00:
  Findings on anti-medicine messaging; monetization of fear.
• 14:00–19:00:
  Influencer reaction/deflection (Means, Michaels tweets); public misunderstanding of media differences.
• 21:50–23:40:
  Reflections on journalism, the future of unbiased news, and the need for transparency in reporting.

Conclusion

Derek Beres offers an insider’s look at high-quality investigative work on health misinformation, contrasted with the strategies and rhetorical tactics of wellness influencers. The episode underscores the importance of media literacy, institutional fact-checking, and the need to hold influencers accountable for the public health impact of their claims.
As conspiracy-infused wellness and New Age culture grows more influential, the episode is a call to vigilance, nuanced media consumption, and supporting journalistic rigor as a bulwark against disinformation.