By Michael J. Critelli | MakeUsWell Newsletter, 

On October 27, 2025, my wife, son, and in-laws ordered takeout from a local restaurant. That simple act reminded me of a neglected topic: the cues influencing our nutritional decisions when we order online or by phone after viewing digital menus.

We’ve often discussed nutritional outcomes from grocery shopping and dining out, but digital menu design—now central to how Americans eat—deserves special focus. According to Grand View Research, the U.S. online-originated food delivery and takeout market is projected to grow at a 9.6% compound annual rate from 2025 to 2030. This isn’t merely a convenience trend; it’s a profound shift in how behavioral design and algorithms shape our eating patterns.

Restaurants have long used “menu engineering”—strategic choices about layout, descriptions, and visual cues—to influence ordering behavior. When dining moves online, those levers become far more powerful. 

On apps like Uber Eats, DoorDash, and Grubhub, every image, ranking, and prompt is guided by real-time data. Our cravings and nutritional outcomes are molded by the invisible architecture of digital interfaces.

Read more

By Michael J. Critelli | MakeUsWell Newsletter, 

I often start my mornings at Starbucks in Darien, Connecticut, or Naples, Florida. They open early, and like most cafés and restaurants today, they’re loud. The music is so high-volume that conversation is difficult.

At a new restaurant in Darien, I once arrived right at 7 a.m. as its first and only customer. The music was blasting. When I asked the host to turn it down, he said the owner insisted it stay loud all day.

This is not a global norm. In Germany, Japan, and much of Europe, cafés maintain a quiet hum. The contrast made me wonder: why do American restaurants equate noise with “energy”? And what does that do to our health?

Research now shows that noise doesn’t just shape ambiance—it reshapes our eating behavior and physiology.

Read more

By Michael J. Critelli | MakeUsWell Newsletter, 

One of the insights we have gained from decades of study, research and management of health programs is that the body is a network, not a collection of parts. Many symptoms are “downstream signals” of dysfunction elsewhere, because physiological systems are tightly interdependent — through nerves, hormones, circulation, and immune pathways.

For decades, digestion was seen as a simple mechanical process—food goes in, nutrients come out, waste leaves. We now know it’s far more complex: the gut is an intelligent, dynamic ecosystem that communicates continuously with the brain, immune system, and metabolism. Its balance—or imbalance—affects nearly every dimension of health, especially how we respond to chronic stress and environmental pressures.

Read more

By Michael J. Critelli | MakeUsWell Newsletter, 

We all know that much of today’s reporting—whether in mainstream outlets or alternative media—fails to meet even minimum journalistic standards. Too often, writers start with a preferred narrative and then cherry-pick or “force-fit” data to support it. Nowhere is this more pervasive than in nutrition reporting.

1. Confounding Variables and Reverse Causation

A favorite media trope is the “diet soda causes diabetes” story. One headline in Eating Well declared: “Diet Sodas May Actually Be Raising Your Diabetes Risk, New Study Says.” The fine print reveals that researchers merely found an association: participants who drank the most diet soda had a 129% higher relative risk of Type 2 diabetes than those who drank the least.

But an association is not causation. People who choose diet sodas may already be struggling with weight gain or insulin resistance—precisely the people at higher risk for diabetes. In other words, drinking diet soda may be an effect, not a cause, of underlying problems.

Even when studies attempt to control for confounding variables (age, gender, existing health status, income, exercise), unmeasured differences remain. Observational studies can suggest relationships, but they rarely prove anything.

Read more

By Michael J. Critelli | MakeUsWell Newsletter, 

Over the last few months, we have presented a diverse body of guidance on optimal nutritional habits. But we have to recognize that someone who accesses nutritional guidance is usually starting from a point of dissatisfaction with his or her current nutritional habits and the effect it has had on his or her body. 

Aside from learning what health professionals recommend relative to what we eat, anyone researching the countless number of resources on nutritional guidance invariably discover that physicians or nutritionists vary in the advice they give on the frequency, size and timing of meals. Differences in advice on meal frequency and fasting don’t necessarily mean that these individuals with deep domain knowledge are contradicting one another — they’re often optimizing for different goals, populations, and contexts.

Read more