I recently came across an article on building trust when patients believe misinformation (~3-minute read — originally written for physicians, but relevant for anyone navigating these conversations).

It made me think about how I used to handle these conversations.

Because early in my career, I felt like it was my job to correct everything.

And in IBD… that’s a lot.

Part of the challenge is that nutrition is one of the few areas where everyone feels qualified to have an “expert” opinion.

As Dr. David Katz put it:

“Everyone who has ever eaten seems to be granted an equally authoritative opinion about nutrition.”

He also makes the comparison:

“I don’t think someone who has been a passenger in a plane is automatically a credible source about how to fly one…”

Misinformation about diet and IBD is common — and how we respond can shape trust, changes and long-term outcomes.

---

Not every belief needs to be corrected

Over time, I realized that correcting every belief isn’t what builds trust, and it’s not what helps people most.

If something isn’t causing harm, especially if it came from a trusted provider or source, I’ll often let it go.

Because correcting every detail doesn’t build trust.

And in many cases, there are more impactful places to start.

But if something is potentially harmful, that’s when we pause and take a closer look.

For example:

• Being told to avoid all fruits and vegetables indefinitely

• Believing nutrition has no role in managing IBD (more on how to approach this here) 

• Following a very restrictive diet that leads to malnutrition, nutrient deficiencies, and complications

• Only eating white cheese, never yellow (maybe not harmful… but a great way to make food unnecessarily stressful — and yes, this really happened)

---

The instinct (and why it doesn’t always work)

It’s very tempting to respond with:

“That’s not true.”
“You don’t need to eat that.”

But in my experience, that approach often shuts the conversation down.

Even if the information is inaccurate, the experience behind it is real.

And just as importantly, we don’t want to make someone feel badly about something they’ve been doing, especially if it’s something they enjoy or feel is helping.

I learned this early on when I told a patient there was no need for her to follow a “Paleo” diet, even though she felt great on it.

She started crying and didn’t follow-up.

It was a good reminder that these conversations aren’t just about accuracy, they’re about trust, identity, and the effort someone has already put in.

And if someone feels dismissed, it becomes much harder to move forward together.

---

What tends to work better

Instead, I get curious first.

For example, instead of saying:

“You don’t need to avoid those foods.”

I might say:

“Can you tell me what you’ve heard about that?”
“What concerns you most about including those foods right now?”

This small shift does a lot:

• It shows respect for the person’s perspective

• It helps uncover where the information came from

• It opens the door to a more productive, collaborative conversation

And importantly, it allows us to meet people where they are, rather than pulling them somewhere they’re not ready to go.

---

Then we build from there

Once I understand the thinking behind a belief, it becomes much easier to respond in a way that feels supportive.

For example:

“That makes sense — there’s a lot of information out there about this right now. Some of that concern comes from early research, but when we look at how it plays out in real life, it’s not always so straightforward.”

Or:

“I hear why that would feel important to avoid. At the same time, I want to make sure we’re not limiting your options in a way that makes it harder to meet your nutrition needs.”

Now the conversation becomes:

👉 not right vs. wrong
👉 but what’s helpful, realistic, and sustainable

---

It’s not just what we say

The article also touched on something else that stuck with me — body language.

Because even when we’re careful with our words, we’re still communicating in other ways.

If I’m being honest, I probably do a lot of subtle nodding with a quiet “hmm…” and then quickly move on.

Which might feel neutral to me…but could unintentionally come across as dismissive.

It was a good reminder that these conversations aren’t just about what we say.

---

Choosing your battles

Some situations call for action. Others call for pause.

Choosing my battles has led to:

• stronger relationships

• less burnout

• and better outcomes — for both patients and providers

Because there are usually plenty of other areas where we can make a meaningful difference right away.

---

A small shift that makes a big difference

In many cases, the goal isn’t just correcting misinformation.

It’s helping people move from:

👉 rigid rules → thoughtful and confident decision-making

That shift takes time.

It takes trust.

Whether you’re the one giving nutrition advice or trying to make sense of it, these conversations can feel overwhelming.

If that’s you — you’re not alone.

It’s not about having the perfect answer — or winning.

It’s about asking the right questions, keeping an open mind, and working toward the best possible outcomes… and maybe keeping the “hmms” to ourselves.