On the
@BioLayne vs
@paulsaladinomd debate that never happened. Here's what you should know. But first:
🚨Note 1: I have Paul's explicit written permission to share this text exchange between him and Layne
🚨Note 2: I feel comfortable posting it without Layne's permission because (i) he lied/lies, details below (ii) he continues to bully, harass, and posture (and I’ve gotten pinged no less than a dozen times in the last 24 hours)
Preface
On the planned debate with Paul Saladino on Peter Attia’s podcast... Yes, Paul declined after receiving the terms of the ‘debate,’ which seemed overly restrictive. I know this because Paul offered me in his place and received an emotional response from Layne that constitutes nothing less than a lie.
Below is a post I wrote long ago and never made because I decided it wasn't worth the oxygen. I'll leave it for what it's worth because it's the truth, one Layne has abused consistently with his emotions and frank likes to avoid a serious discussion.
Why am I making it now? Well, my hope is this gets him to - at minimum - sit down with
@paulsaladinomd (or
@ChrisMasterjohn) on
@realDaveFeldman podcast... because he's made it quite clear that... to quote
@BioLayne "Nick Can go fuck himself. This will be the only response I have about why I don't interact with Nick"
🚨Now... the post I held back... and the truth🚨
In the spirit of curiosity, no avatar on social media has fascinated me more than
@BioLayne.
You’d think that, for someone who’s clearly a successful businessman, he’d possess stronger instincts for self-preservation. Yet his public behavior suggests otherwise. So, let’s rewind, examine the behavioral history, and perform a social media autopsy on what makes this situation so baffling.
A few years ago, I was generating content I knew would get Layne’s attention—most notably the Oreo vs. Statin study. Anticipating engagement, I reached out privately to build a bridge. I offered him the opportunity to review and comment on the manuscript before submission, with full acknowledgment and credit. It was a sincere attempt to collaborate in good faith.
He failed to accept that the offer. But later, to his partial credit, we engaged in what seemed to be a productive group chat about a meta-analysis of human randomized controlled trials on cholesterol, lipids, and lean-mass hyper-responders. Layne appeared curious. We provided him with everything—data, context, open-access code—the whole package ht/
@realDaveFeldman @AdrianSotoMota
Then came the first odd choice.
Rather than collaborate or even verify his understanding with us, Layne released solo coverage that completely ignored the human RCT evidence.
This was especially ironic, given his constant appeals to “human randomized controlled trials” as the gold standard of rigorous science.
In that video, he also made physiological errors—errors we had already explained to him privately.
He publicly asked for feedback.
I took him at his word. In a **real-time response video to his coverage of our data** I corrected his factual mistakes and pointed out his omissions. (I also pointed out instances of inappropriate bullying and vulgarity in response to the negative feedback on his presentation, but at no point did I insult him personally.)
Then came the stranger turn.
Layne went silent.
He declared he’d never engage with me again on social media. Yet, as my name began to circulate in overlapping circles, he started repeating a bizarre and easily falsifiable narrative—that I had “gone out of my way to attack him while his mother was sick.”
Here’s what actually happened: Layne was actively posting about our data on Instagram and Twitter during that period. My real-time response—focused entirely on the data—simply coincided with that personal moment. I have compassion for anyone dealing with family hardship.
But let’s be honest: the man was literally wearing and selling a shirt that read Data > Feelings in the very video where he misrepresented data and physiology than appealed not only to emotions but a lie to make the emotions palatable.
The irony writes itself.
Instead of addressing the data, he manufactured an emotional alibi—a story that let him avoid accountability while painting himself as the victim.
And here’s where things got truly bizarre.
Over a year later, Layne resurrected this lie publicly.
Despite the fact that timelines, videos, DMs, and tweets have immutable timestamps (and witnesses), he leaned into an appeal to emotion designed to obscure verifiable facts. It’s an obvious fabrication—and a poor strategic choice. Because the chronology is transparent.
The self-proclaimed “BS Crusher” had his BS crushed—and he couldn’t (he can’t) handle it.
Now, every insult and every shallow flex only exposes the hypocrisy.
Layne’s supposed devotion to “data over feelings” has devolved into a pitiful inversion: Feelings over Data.
Does he think people can’t see it? Or has he repeated the story so many times that he’s convinced himself it’s true?
I’m not sure. But it’s curious.
#StayCurious
Tagging some people who pinged me in Layne's
@thegarybrecka and
@paulsaladinomd won't debate me flexes. I can't reply there because he's blocked me for the reasons explained above.
@reallyoptimized @the_meat_market
@defabstar1 @thegarybrecka @insightfulposts @1Ronin_Jedi