
The Best Wellness Advice Has Always Been Free
This is an edition of Time-Travel Thursdays, a journey through The Atlantic 's archives to contextualize the present. Sign up here.
Allow me to make myself sound very dainty and attractive: Last year, I was diagnosed with inflammatory bowel disease. This was an unfortunate development, I decided, and so not in line with ' brat summer.' I handled the news like any journalist might—with compulsive research and fact-checking. My fear directed me to Reddit threads and scientific studies, to new diet plans and workout regimens and supplement orders, until my unremitting quest for answers landed me in the Zoom office of a functional-medicine doctor, a woman who charged me a couple of hundred bucks to tell me that I should eat more boiled plantains.
My search for wellness had gone too far. I was spending money I didn't have to try to fix an illness with origins I'd never understand, much less control. Yet I trust that I'm far from alone in this desire to feel good. Every year, the average American spends more than $6,000 on 'wellness,' an imprecise category that includes both fads and legitimate endeavors, with offerings as varied as diagnostic technologies and protein popcorn. Across the world, wellness is a $6.3 trillion business—outpacing even the pharmaceutical industry—and Americans are by far the biggest spenders. Although some health issues require interventions or specialists (which can be exorbitantly expensive), the wellness industry tells Americans that no matter their condition—or lack thereof—there's always some treatment they should be buying. There's always more Googling and optimizing to be done.
Take the journalist Amy Larocca's book, How to Be Well, which details her wellness-industry misadventures, including 'gravity' colonic cleanses, $200-a-month prescription herbs, and $1,000 Goop events. In a recent Atlantic review of the book, the writer Sheila McClear observed how widespread the 'wellness craze' has become, noting that 'in a nation known for its relatively poor health, nearly everybody seems to be thinking about how to be healthy.'
Yet, like the human body's frailty, America's obsession with wellness is far from new. In our archives, I found a letter addressed to someone else facing an unsexy stomach ailment: ' A Letter to a Dyspeptic,' published in 1859, includes some remarkably sassy advice from an anonymous writer to a 19th-century gentleman with indigestion. This writer is all tough love, unafraid to call the gentleman an 'unfortunate individual,' a man of 'ripe old age, possibly a little over-ripe, at thirty-five,' and, due to the fellow's unique bathing habits, an 'insane merman.'
The dyspeptic man had spent the past years suffering, quitting his business and doling out cash to questionable doctors and therapies, to little avail. 'You are haunting water-cures, experimenting on life-pills, holding private conferences with medical electricians, and thinking of a trip to the Bermudas,' the author writes. But this search for a cure came at a high cost: 'O mistaken economist! can you afford the cessation of labor and the ceaseless drugging and douching of your last few years?'
Any hyperfixation on wellness can be draining and futile; an endless search for answers to one's ailments might be alluring, but 'to seek health as you are now seeking it, regarding every new physician as if he were Pandora,' the writer warns, 'is really rather unpromising.'
In lieu of expensive treatments, the writer advises that the dyspeptic man do three things: bathe, breathe, and exercise. (Another suggestion is to purchase 'a year's subscription to the 'Atlantic Monthly,'' one of the 'necessaries of life' for happiness—it seems we writers have never been above the shameless plug.) Notably, all of these (except the Atlantic subscription, starting at $79.99) are more or less free.
Written almost two centuries later, Larocca's book ends on a similar note, championing the kind of health advice that doesn't hurt your wallet. After her tiresome and expensive foray into the world of wellness, she 'doesn't recommend a single product, practice, or service, although she does name one tip that helped her,' McClear notes. 'It's a simple breathing exercise. And it's free.'
America's wellness methods have changed over time—sometimes evolving for the better. (The 1859 letter, for instance, details how some philosophers believed in being as sedentary as possible because 'trees lived longer than men because they never stirred from their places.') Even so, as skyrocketing costs and medical mistrust plague American health care, the wellness industry churns out a carousel of treatments, touting sweeping benefits that are often dubious at best. Compared with the many big promises that 'gravity' colonics and supplement companies might make, most health tips that have stood the test of time are far more quotidian: sleep, exercise, breathe. Their simplicity can be both healing and accessible. The body has 'power and beauty,' the anonymous writer noted more than a century ago, 'when we consent to give it a fair chance.'
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles

Los Angeles Times
32 minutes ago
- Los Angeles Times
Kennedy's new CDC panel includes members who have criticized vaccines, spread misinformation
NEW YORK — U.S. Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. on Wednesday named eight new vaccine policy advisers to replace the panel that he abruptly dismissed earlier this week. They include a scientist who researched mRNA vaccine technology and became a conservative darling for his criticisms of COVID-19 vaccines, a leading critic of pandemic-era lockdowns, and a professor of operations management. Kennedy's decision to 'retire' the previous 17-member Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices was widely decried by doctors' groups and public health organizations, who feared the advisers would be replaced by a group aligned with Kennedy's desire to reassess — and possibly end — longstanding vaccination recommendations. On Tuesday, before he announced his picks, Kennedy said: 'We're going to bring great people onto the ACIP panel — not anti-vaxxers — bringing people on who are credentialed scientists.' The new appointees include Vicky Pebsworth, a regional director for the National Assn. of Catholic Nurses. She has been listed as a board member and volunteer director for the National Vaccine Information Center, a group that is widely considered to be a leading source of vaccine misinformation. Another is Dr. Robert Malone, the former mRNA researcher who emerged as a close adviser to Kennedy during the measles outbreak. Malone, who runs a wellness institute and a popular blog, rose to prominence during the COVID-19 pandemic as he relayed conspiracy theories around the outbreak and the vaccines that followed. He has appeared on podcasts and other conservative news outlets where he's promoted unproven and alternative treatments for measles and COVID-19. He has claimed that millions of Americans were hypnotized into taking the COVID-19 shots and has suggested that those vaccines cause a form of AIDS. He's downplayed deaths related to one of the largest measles outbreaks in the U.S. in years. Malone told the Associated Press he will do his best 'to serve with unbiased objectivity and rigor.' Other appointees include Dr. Martin Kulldorff, a biostatistician and epidemiologist who was a co-author of the Great Barrington Declaration, an October 2020 letter maintaining that pandemic shutdowns were causing irreparable harm. Dr. Cody Meissner, a former ACIP member, also was named. Abram Wagner of the University of Michigan's school of public health, who investigates vaccination programs, said he's not satisfied with the composition of the committee. 'The previous ACIP was made up of technical experts who have spent their lives studying vaccines,' he said. Most people on the current list 'don't have the technical capacity that we would expect out of people who would have to make really complicated decisions involving interpreting complicated scientific data.' He said having Pebsworth on the board is 'incredibly problematic' since she is involved in an organization that 'distributes a lot of misinformation.' Kennedy made the announcement in a social media post on Wednesday. The committee, created in 1964, makes recommendations to the director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. CDC directors almost always approve those recommendations on how vaccines that have been approved by the Food and Drug Administration should be used. The CDC's final recommendations are widely heeded by doctors and guide vaccination programs. The other appointees are: Of the eight named by Kennedy, perhaps the most experienced in vaccine policy is Meissner, an expert in pediatric infectious diseases at Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center, who has previously served as a member of both ACIP and the Food and Drug Administration's vaccine advisory panel. During his five-year term as an FDA adviser, the committee was repeatedly asked to review and vote on the safety and effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines that were rapidly developed to fight the pandemic. In September 2021, he joined the majority of panelists who voted against a plan from the Biden administration to offer an extra vaccine dose to all American adults. The panel instead recommended that the extra shot should be limited to seniors and those at higher risk of the disease. Ultimately, the FDA disregarded the panel's recommendation and approved an extra vaccine dose for all adults. In addition to serving on government panels, Meissner has helped author policy statements and vaccination schedules for the American Academy of Pediatrics. ACIP members typically serve in staggered four-year terms, although several appointments were delayed during the Biden administration before positions were filled last year. The voting members are all supposed to have scientific or clinical expertise in immunization, except for one 'consumer representative' who can bring perspective on community and social facets of vaccine programs. Kennedy, a leading voice in the anti-vaccine movement before becoming the U.S. government's top health official, has accused the committee of being too closely aligned with vaccine manufacturers and of rubber-stamping vaccines. ACIP policies require members to state past collaborations with vaccine companies and to recuse themselves from votes in which they had a conflict of interest, but Kennedy has dismissed those safeguards as weak. Most of the people who best understand vaccines are those who have researched them, which usually requires some degree of collaboration with the companies that develop and sell them, said Jason Schwartz, a Yale University health policy researcher. 'If you are to exclude any reputable, respected vaccine expert who has ever engaged even in a limited way with the vaccine industry, you're likely to have a very small pool of folks to draw from,' Schwartz said. The U.S. Senate confirmed Kennedy in February after he promised he would not change the vaccination schedule. But less than a week later, he vowed to investigate childhood vaccines that prevent measles, polio and other dangerous diseases. Kennedy has ignored some of the recommendations ACIP voted for in April, including the endorsement of a new combination shot that protects against five strains of meningococcal bacteria and the expansion of vaccinations against RSV. In late May, Kennedy disregarded the committee and announced the government would change the recommendation for children and pregnant women to get COVID-19 shots. On Monday, Kennedy ousted all 17 members of the ACIP, saying he would appoint a new group before the next scheduled meeting in late June. The agenda for that meeting has not yet been posted, but a recent federal notice said votes are expected on vaccinations against flu, COVID-19, HPV, RSV and meningococcal bacteria. A HHS spokesman did not respond to a question about whether there would be only eight ACIP members, or whether more will be named later. Stobbe writes for the Associated Press. Associated Press reporters Matthew Perrone, Amanda Seitz, Devi Shastri and Laura Ungar contributed to this report. The Associated Press Health and Science Department receives support from the Howard Hughes Medical Institute's Science and Educational Media Group and the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. The AP is solely responsible for all content.


Boston Globe
an hour ago
- Boston Globe
How a purge at one obscure panel could disrupt US vaccinations
On Monday, Kennedy, long a vaccine skeptic, Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up On the social platform X, he promised not to replace the panel's experts with 'ideological anti-vaxxers.' On Wednesday, Kennedy Advertisement For years, Kennedy has argued that American children receive too many shots and has falsely claimed that vaccines are not tested in placebo-controlled studies. Critics fear he is now setting the stage for a rollback of federal recommendations. Robert F. Kennedy Jr., Secretary of Health and Human Services, testifies on Capitol Hill in Washington, May 14, 2025. HAIYUN JIANG/NYT 'I'm very, very worried about young children in this country,' said Dr. Helen Chu, professor of medicine at the University of Washington and one of the committee members who was fired. If the panel's new members 'don't believe in vaccines, then I think it puts us in a very dangerous place.' Advertisement Richard Hughes IV, who teaches vaccine law at George Washington University, predicted that the new committee would move to pare back the childhood vaccination schedule 'relatively quickly.' The Department of Health and Human Services did not respond to a request for comment. 'All of these individuals are committed to evidence-based medicine, gold-standard science, and common sense,' Kennedy said in a message on X. 'They have each committed to demanding definitive safety and efficacy data before making any new vaccine recommendations.' He also acknowledged that the panel would 'review safety and efficacy data for the current schedule as well.' The upheaval arrives as measles infections approach the highest level in decades; whooping cough has risen significantly, too, compared with this time last year. Steep cuts to global immunization programs also make it more likely that infectious diseases, such as polio, may reach American shores. Alarmed, members of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform have asked Kennedy to provide all communications and documents related to the dismissal of the committee and a 'detailed description of the rationale for removing each individual' by June 24, according to a letter obtained by The New York Times. The American Medical Association called for an immediate reversal of the purge and resolved to 'identify and evaluate' alternative sources of advice on vaccines. It is unclear whether Kennedy will appoint more members -- there is no required minimum -- before the next scheduled meeting at the end of June. And no one can say whether or how the decisions of the reshaped panel may diverge from current recommendations. Advertisement But any softening of federal recommendations regarding vaccination would ripple through the nation in unpredictable ways. Access to the shots eventually may depend on where you live, which insurance policy you hold and which doctor you see, experts said. 'That obviously is going to decrease the number of people who are protected with these vaccines,' said Dr. Mysheika Roberts, the health commissioner of Columbus, Ohio. 'I am concerned about what that means about herd immunity, what that means about outbreaks and infections.' Under the Affordable Care Act, insurance companies are required to cover the cost of any vaccine recommended by the ACIP. Losing that endorsement means that some insurance companies may choose not to pay for immunizations. Nor could those shots be offered for free through the Vaccines for Children program. The measles vaccine can cost up to $250 and the four-dose polio series up to $340. 'You'd essentially have a two-tier system where people who have cash at hand can purchase their own vaccines if they're not recommended, and those who don't have the money may have to go without,' said Dr. Yvonne Maldonado, a pediatrician at Stanford University and one of the fired panelists. The panel could take a more measured approach, perhaps advising that a doctor's sign-off should be required for some immunizations. The vaccines program would still cover it, but reimbursement from private insurers would be more difficult to enforce, Hughes said. The Vaccines for Children program was created after a measles epidemic from 1989 to 1991 led to tens of thousands of cases and hundreds of deaths. More than half of the infected children were unvaccinated even though many had seen a doctor, because they could not afford the shots, according to the CDC. Advertisement Cutting back on free access to immunizations 'is not a strategy to even think about -- only vaccinating potentially the half of the population that has health insurance,' Chu said. If measles continues to resurge, for example, even vaccinated people will be at risk, she said. Vaccinations are not profitable for clinics, and reduced demand could mean that fewer places bother to offer the shots. 'In places where you know there's a large anti-vax sentiment, there may not be financial incentive, or any incentive, to keep those vaccines in stock,' she said. ACIP makes recommendations for immunizations. But the authority to mandate them rests with the states. Even if the federal government walked away from some recommendations, most, if not all, states are likely to maintain the current mandates for school-age children, said Claire Hannan, executive director of the Association of Immunization Managers, which represents state and local officials. 'Even where legislators are chipping away at requirements and mandates, there's a commitment to protect children,' she said. Still, she added, 'our members are very confused.' Now some scientists are considering establishing alternatives to federal guidance on vaccines. 'The new ACIP cannot be trusted to oversee unbiased and scientifically sound vaccine policy development,' said Michael Osterholm, a public health researcher at the University of Minnesota. He and other experts have formed a new group, called the Vaccine Integrity Project, to offer science-based advice on immunization. Members of the ACIP are usually vetted thoroughly. It took more than four months for Roberts, who was set to join the panel in July, to be accepted, and several more weeks to fill out at least 50 forms, including disclosures of conflict of interest. The committee's members typically rotate in staggered four-year terms to ensure some continuity and institutional memory. Advertisement Mina Zadeh, a CDC scientist, has been named to oversee the committee, but the rest of her team has not been set up. Staff members who lead the committee's work groups may meet with her 'starting early next week,' according to a recording of an internal meeting obtained by the Times. But the panel's next meeting is scheduled to begin June 25. Dr. Adam Ratner, a pediatric infectious diseases physician and expert on vaccine policy, said he worried the new members could not be prepared on such short notice and without the help of previous members or CDC personnel. 'This raises the question of whether the goal here is for ACIP to be able to do its job,' he added. 'Kennedy has accused the prior committee members of conflicts of interest and for rubber-stamping things, but I think that's exactly what we're looking at with this group.' This article originally appeared in .


The Hill
an hour ago
- The Hill
Medically tailored nutrition can help make America healthy
Chronic disease is a threat not only to Americans' physical health but also to the nation's financial health. Conditions like heart disease, cancer, diabetes and kidney failure account for trillions of dollars in annual health care spending and are among the leading causes of death in the U.S. The growing consensus is clear that our health care system needs better solutions to manage chronic diseases. One promising tool is surprisingly simple: food. But not just any food. We need nutritious, locally sourced, medically tailored meals — food-based interventions designed by registered dietitian nutritionists specifically for chronically ill Americans. These medically tailored meals are proven to improve health outcomes, reduce hospitalizations and lower health care costs. Just as important, they can reduce patients' dependency on medications, making health care more effective and affordable. At the Boston-based nonprofit I lead, we have seen firsthand how medically tailored meals can transform lives. One of our clients, for example, reduced his daily medications from 14 to just four after enrolling in our program. This is what we mean when we say 'food is medicine' — food, either alone or in conjunction with pharmaceuticals, can help patients become and stay healthier. These meals are not only about nourishment. They are about addressing the root causes of chronic diseases while offering real cost savings. Medically tailored meals prioritize nutrition, treating the underlying causes of disease, not just symptoms. They reduce dependence on medication, leading to fewer prescriptions and better health outcomes. These meals prioritize fresh ingredients over processed foods, with a commitment to quality local food. They lead to immediate cost savings, with reductions in hospitalizations and medical costs. And they support local businesses, strengthening local farms and fishing industries through prioritization of regional sourcing. Does it work? The evidence is clear. Studies published in JAMA and Health Affairs show that medically tailored meals reduce hospitalizations by 49 percent and emergency room visits by 70 percent. They have also been shown to lower total medical costs by a remarkable 16 percent. Another recent study published in Health Affairs estimates that a nationwide rollout of medically tailored meals could save $32 billion annually. In a time of policy uncertainty, one thing is clear: 'Food is medicine' is a bipartisan opportunity to transform health care. The Make America Healthy Again movement is dedicated to reducing the burden of chronic diseases, decreasing reliance on pharmaceuticals and integrating nutrition into health care. The Senate MAHA Caucus is already focused on improving access to high-quality, nutrient-dense foods and addressing the root causes of disease. Congress should act now to expand medically tailored nutrition for veterans, older Americans and people with disabilities — groups who stand to benefit the most. Let us seize this moment and make medically tailored nutrition a central part of making America healthy again. David B. Waters is the CEO of Community Servings, a Boston-based nonprofit provider of medically tailored meals and nutrition services, and founder of the AMPL Institute.