A teenager, type 2 diabetes and a viral diet claim
Sam, 14, lives with his mother, aunt and two younger siblings in a city suburb. His GP has diagnosed type 2 diabetes (HbA1c 64 mmol/mol) and prescribed metformin, alongside advice to reduce sugary drinks and increase vegetables. A dietitian recommended a balanced plate and a 12-week food-budget plan. Sam’s mother earns $900 a week after rent; the household food budget is $220. Sam has seen a TikTok creator with 1.2 million followers claim that ‘20 g of carbs a day reverses insulin resistance’, that seed oils are ‘toxic’, and that metformin is unnecessary. The creator sells a $79 supplement pack. Sam’s mother wants to stop the medication and buy the supplements, saying the dietitian’s advice is ‘too hard’ for their budget and whānau commitments. Sam is keen because the creator is young and ‘looks healthy’. The GP appointment is in four weeks; the whānau are also preparing for a tangihanga, which will stretch time and money. The family has no reliable internet at home, but Sam uses school Wi-Fi.
1. Evaluate the credibility of the influencer’s claims and the dietitian/GP advice using at least three criteria (for example authority, evidence, bias, currency, purpose, or accountability).
Read the worked answer
Authority: the influencer has no verifiable nutrition or medical qualification. The GP and dietitian are registered, accountable practitioners who can be held to professional standards.
Evidence: the claim that 20 g of carbs a day ‘reverses’ insulin resistance overstates the evidence. Very-low-carbohydrate diets can improve some markers in some adults, but evidence in adolescents is limited and must be supervised. The dietitian’s balanced-plate advice aligns with population guidelines and systematic reviews and is individualised to Sam’s HbA1c of 64 mmol/mol and metformin use.
Bias and purpose: the influencer sells a $79 supplement pack, a direct financial conflict. Social media rewards extreme claims, not nuance. The dietitian has no product to sell, although their advice still needs checking for cost and cultural fit.
Currency and accountability: both are current, but the influencer answers to engagement metrics, not a professional body. The dietitian and GP can be questioned, can refer Sam, and must record decisions.
Judgement: the influencer’s claims have low credibility because of the conflict of interest, lack of qualifications and overstatement. The GP and dietitian have higher credibility, but their advice is not automatically practical for a $220 budget. The family should not stop metformin without the GP.
2. Recommend a practical response for the whānau that respects Sam’s autonomy, safety, and cultural obligations.
Read the worked answer
Recommendation: keep the metformin and the GP appointment; do not buy the supplement until the GP or pharmacist checks for interactions. Ask the GP for a funded dietitian follow-up and a written plan that fits $220 a week.
Respect autonomy: let Sam choose which vegetables and meals to trial, and let him track his energy and mood. Use a four-week experiment: swap sugary drinks for water, add one vegetable to dinner, and use frozen vegetables to control cost. This gives Sam control without a risky very-low-carbohydrate diet.
Safety: a sudden 20 g carbohydrate diet in a 14-year-old on metformin could risk hypoglycaemia and poor growth. The GP must supervise any major change.
Cultural obligations: involve the aunt and mother in planning. For the tangihanga, contribute a lower-sugar vegetable dish and water rather than trying to control the whole menu. Ask the dietitian for Māori and Pasifika food examples so the plan is realistic.
Media literacy: at school, Sam can check who benefits from the claim and look for a registered professional. The influencer earns from supplements; that is a conflict of interest. This response protects safety, respects Sam’s growing autonomy, and works with whānau rather than blaming them.