Keep Factually independent
Whether you agree or disagree with our analysis, these conversations matter for democracy. We don't take money from political groups - even a $5 donation helps us keep it that way.
How did Neurocept respond to Dr Gupta's comments?
Executive summary
Neurocept marketing has used videos that appear to feature Dr. Sanjay Gupta promoting a “honey recipe” and Alzheimer’s claims; reporting and archive material show Gupta has publicly denied endorsing miracle cures and described the format of his work as answering questions with “science and facts,” while third‑party commentary accuses Neurocept of using deepfakes and fake endorsements [1] [2]. Available sources do not provide a direct, contemporaneous statement from Neurocept responding to Dr. Gupta’s comments; instead the record in these items is: critics allege deepfake misuse of Gupta’s image and Gupta’s own programming emphasizes evidence over miracle claims [2] [1].
1. What Dr. Gupta actually says on record: emphasis on evidence, not miracle cures
Dr. Sanjay Gupta’s documented public role is as a medical correspondent who answers health questions and “try[s] and answer them for you using science and facts,” which is inconsistent with endorsing a single “honey recipe” cure for Alzheimer’s [1]. In his public appearances he has also discussed issues like AI in medicine and the need to “trust, but verify,” language that undercuts the credibility of viral, unverified medical claims presented as personal endorsements [3] [1]. That public posture provides context for why Gupta would disavow or distance himself from commercial pitches that attribute miracle cures to him.
2. Accusations against Neurocept: deepfakes and fake endorsements
Investigative commentary about Neurocept available in the current reporting alleges the product is “propped up by deepfake ads” and repeatedly uses fabricated celebrity endorsements — naming Dr. Gupta, Anderson Cooper and others as figures whose likenesses appear in polished promotional videos [2]. The critique made by Ibisik presents the core facts: the videos are emotionally persuasive but, according to that author, the endorsements are not real and the advertised “honey recipe” and Alzheimer’s reversal claim lack credible evidence [2]. That piece frames Neurocept as a marketing construct rather than a medically substantiated therapy [2].
3. What Neurocept has said in reply — not documented in these sources
Available sources do not mention any direct statement from Neurocept responding to Dr. Gupta’s comments or to allegations of deepfakes (not found in current reporting). The materials here include an exposé-style blog post alleging misuse of Gupta’s likeness and Gupta’s own media output emphasizing evidence; neither contains a Neurocept press release, legal filing, or on‑the‑record rebuttal cited in these documents [2] [1].
4. Two plausible reaction pathways and why they matter
When public figures are misused in promotional content there are typically two observable responses: the company either issues a denial/clarification or it ignores critics until legal or platform actions force changes. The current record shows critics asserting a scam narrative and Gupta’s public work signaling skepticism of miracle claims, but it does not show which pathway Neurocept chose — denial, legal challenge, platform takedown requests, or silence [2] [1]. That absence matters because a transparent company response would either refute or confirm the use of doctored media; silence leaves consumers and platforms to judge based on outside reporting [2].
5. How the public and platforms have been told to react
One of the explicit takeaways in the critical reporting is to “protect your wallet” and treat hair‑raising health ads with suspicion, especially when they show polished videos featuring recognizable journalists or celebrities; the Ibisik commentary urges readers to treat Neurocept as a “scam supplement” until proven otherwise [2]. Gupta’s own public framing — “science and facts” and “trust, but verify” for AI — reinforces that media literacy and verification are the correct default responses to such advertising [1] [3].
6. Limitations and next reporting steps
The sources provided do not include a direct quote from Neurocept or a formal denial from Dr. Gupta specifically addressing these Neurocept ads; they include a critical exposé and Gupta’s general public statements on medical communication. To close the story, reporters should seek an on‑the‑record response from Neurocept, preservation and forensic analysis of the contested videos, and a statement from CNN or Gupta’s representatives confirming whether the likenesses were used without permission [2] [1].