By Dr Chun Tang — MBChB (Manchester), MRCGP, MBA · Practising NHS & Private GP · Founder, Little Ox

Dr Tang in the Press: Half of UK Young People Self-Diagnose on Google — Here's What a GP Says About That

I was quoted prominently in Pharmaphorum as part of their coverage of a UK survey finding that 59% of people Google their symptoms before seeing a doctor — and that almost half of 16–24 year olds have bought medications based on their own online self-diagnosis. The question the article asked was: is this a problem?

My answer was more nuanced than a simple yes or no.

What I Said in the Press

Self-diagnosis online isn't inherently wrong. Patients who understand their symptoms, who have done reasonable background research, who arrive at an appointment already informed — these patients often have better conversations with their doctors. Taking responsibility for your own health is generally a positive thing.

The problem is reliability. Many health websites are unreliable, biased, or actively selling something. They can lead people in the wrong direction — causing unnecessary anxiety about benign symptoms, or (more dangerously) providing false reassurance about symptoms that warrant urgent attention. About 30% of people in the survey said that Googling health symptoms made them more anxious, and a significant proportion admitted to not checking whether the sites they used were credible.

My advice was clear: use recognised, trustworthy sources. In the UK, that means NHS.uk, Cancer Research UK, NICE, the BNF, and sites affiliated with medical Royal Colleges. If you're uncertain, a pharmacist can advise on minor symptoms. And if symptoms persist, worsen, or concern you — see a doctor. Online research should inform your healthcare decisions, not replace them.

What I Want People to Know About Supplement Information Specifically

This quote in Pharmaphorum resonated with me particularly because the supplement industry is one of the areas where online information quality is worst. The incentive structure — brands writing their own product content — produces exactly the problem I described: unreliable, biased information that doesn't have the patient's best interests at heart.

This is why every claim I make for Little Ox products is grounded in the peer-reviewed evidence, with honest caveats where evidence is preliminary. I do not claim NMN will make you live longer. I do not claim it will prevent disease. What I do say is what the clinical trials actually show — improved NAD+ levels, measurable improvements in muscle function, insulin sensitivity and aerobic capacity at studied doses, and a compelling mechanistic basis for the long-term benefits that longer-duration human trials have yet to fully characterise.

If you want to research NMN and decide for yourself:

• David Sinclair's research at Harvard — available on PubMed and via his lab's publications
• The 2021 Science paper on NMN and insulin sensitivity in premenopausal women with prediabetes
• The 2022 trial on NMN and muscle function in older men
• Our own blog, where I explain the evidence honestly: Does NMN Really Work? An Honest Doctor's Review

Start with NMN Pure at £7.99 — the lowest price for high-specification β-NMN, independently verified in the UK — and judge for yourself.

---