A few posts ago, I laid out what chronic inflammation actually is and why it sits at the center of so much of what I treat. This post is the natural follow-up: what actually works to address it. I want to be as honest about the evidence strength here as I've tried to be throughout this site — some of what I'll cover is well-established, and some is genuinely promising but still developing.
The foundation: interventions with the strongest evidence
Before getting to anything more specialized, it's worth being direct that the interventions with the most robust evidence behind them are also the least glamorous. I don't say that to undersell them — the research supporting these is considerably stronger than for most of what gets marketed as "anti-inflammatory."
Reducing visceral fat. Since visceral fat tissue actively produces inflammatory signaling molecules, reducing it is one of the most direct ways to lower systemic inflammation. This is part of why GLP-1 therapy, bariatric surgery, and other approaches that meaningfully reduce visceral fat tend to show measurable improvements in inflammatory markers, independent of their other benefits.
Regular physical activity. I touched on this in the last post — exercise is one of the most consistently supported interventions for lowering baseline inflammation, and it works through multiple mechanisms: reducing visceral fat, improving insulin sensitivity, and directly influencing inflammatory signaling. Both cardiovascular and resistance training contribute here, which is part of why I think of muscle mass and fitness, covered in the last two posts, as inflammation-relevant in their own right, not just separately beneficial.
Nutrition patterns that limit processed foods and refined sugar. Diets high in refined carbohydrates and processed foods are associated with higher inflammatory markers, while diets emphasizing whole foods, fiber, and healthy fats are associated with lower ones. I'd rather not overpromise a specific named diet as a cure — the evidence supports a pattern, not a single prescriptive plan — but the general direction is well supported.
Adequate sleep. Poor sleep, both short duration and poor quality, is associated with elevated inflammatory markers. This one gets undervalued clinically, in my experience, relative to how consistently it shows up in the research.
Why I don't chase inflammation to zero
I mentioned this in the last post and want to reinforce it here: inflammation is a regulatory system, not simply a problem to be eliminated. The cautionary example I referenced earlier — a major cardiovascular trial that successfully suppressed inflammation but also increased infection risk — is a useful reminder that aggressive, broad suppression of inflammation isn't automatically the right goal. The aim is bringing chronic, low-grade inflammation back into a healthy range, not eliminating an immune response that exists for good reason.
Where peptide therapy fits into this picture
This is where I want to bring back a thread from an earlier post on healthspan: peptide therapy, used as an adjunct within a broader plan, is increasingly part of how some patients approach systemic inflammation specifically.
I want to be careful and precise here, the same way I was in that earlier post. Some peptide compounds are being studied specifically for their potential role in modulating inflammatory pathways, tissue repair, and recovery. This is a genuinely active area of interest, grounded in real biological plausibility — GLP-1 receptors and several peptide-receptor systems are present in tissues well beyond their most obvious targets, including immune cells. But I don't want to overstate where the evidence currently stands. This remains a developing area, and the honest answer for a meaningful share of peptide compounds discussed for inflammation is "biologically plausible and being studied," not "proven and standardized."
What I can say with more confidence is this: for a patient whose care already involves peptide therapy for other reasons, and where a clinical picture supports it, addressing inflammation may be one of the relevant considerations in how that therapy is approached. It's an adjunct within a broader plan — layered on top of the foundational interventions above, not a substitute for them, and not something I'd recommend pursuing in isolation, disconnected from the rest of a comprehensive plan.
What I'd want you to take from this
If you're thinking about your own inflammatory health, the highest-yield place to start is also the least exotic: reducing visceral fat, moving regularly, sleeping enough, and eating in a way that limits processed food and refined sugar. Those four things have more evidence behind them than almost anything else you'll find marketed for this purpose. Peptide therapy and other more specialized interventions may have a role for some patients, layered on top of that foundation, but they were never meant to replace it.
This closes out the connected pair of posts on inflammation — the science in the earlier post, and the practical approach here. Together, I hope they've made the case for why I think this is one of the most important, and most commonly underexplained, concepts in metabolic health today.
Curious whether inflammation might be playing a bigger role in your own health than you'd expect? [Reach out / subscribe / etc. — placeholder for your CTA.]
Medical disclaimer: This content is provided for general educational and informational purposes only and does not constitute medical advice. It is not intended to diagnose, treat, cure, or prevent any condition, and it does not create a physician-patient relationship. Every patient's medical history, health status, and treatment needs are different. Always consult your own physician or qualified healthcare provider before starting, stopping, or changing any medication or treatment, and before making any decisions based on information found here. If you are experiencing a medical emergency, call 911 or go to your nearest emergency room.