If Part 1 made anything clear, it’s this: we’ve got a growing number of people with loud voices and large platforms who don’t actually coach—they preach.
They may be credentialed. They may be bold. But that doesn’t mean they’re helpful.
In fact, one of the easiest ways to spot the shift from coaching to preaching is how these individuals treat authority. Credentials become a weapon. Experience becomes a one-way conversation. And any deviation from their narrative? It’s labeled as ignorance, emotional bias, or misinformation.
Let’s break this down.
Coaches ask better questions. Preachers defend their answers.
A good coach doesn’t panic when you question the process. A good coach actually wants your feedback. They listen for patterns, for roadblocks, for what's not being said. Preachers, on the other hand, rely on their position of power. They repeat the same talking points and treat questions like threats.
You’ve probably seen this in the wild. Maybe you’ve asked, “Why am I more fatigued in perimenopause?” or “Why does the deficit I used to use no longer work?”
And instead of curiosity, you’re met with something like:
“It’s just CICO. You’re doing it wrong.”
“Calories don’t care about your feelings.”
“Your metabolism didn’t slow. You just got lazy.”
That’s not education. That’s dismissal dressed in dogma.
Let’s talk about credentials.
Yes, we want people who understand physiology. Yes, we want research-backed guidance. But having a PhD or certification doesn't automatically make someone a good coach. Especially if their content constantly invalidates lived experience or reduces every issue to a single variable.
Take the hormone-cortisol-weight connection, for example. There are studies that suggest cortisol can impact fat storage, appetite, and muscle breakdown. There are also studies that show these effects are context-dependent and not universal. A good coach walks you through that nuance. A preacher cherry-picks the side that proves their point and calls everything else a “grift.”
It gets worse when money or ego is involved.
Some of these figures build their brands on “calling out BS.” But when someone challenges them? Suddenly it’s “you’re just emotional,” “you’re not qualified,” or “that’s anecdotal.” You can’t win in that environment—and that’s the point. They don’t want conversation. They want control.
So what do you do with that?
You learn to vet your sources. You ask questions like:
-
Do they acknowledge nuance, or only push absolutes?
-
Do they cite studies and explain what they mean?
-
Do they respect that someone’s experience might be valid even if it’s not in a research paper?
-
Do they offer tools, or do they just tell you what not to do?
-
Do they lead with curiosity, or condescension?
Because the truth is, evidence-based coaching is powerful—but only if it’s paired with empathy.
In Part 3, I’ll walk you through how to recognize supportive, empowering coaches (and steer clear of the ones just selling a sermon).
Miss part 1? Read it here.