Our Response to Netflix (Un)Well: Essential Oils, Cancer, Ingestion & MLMs

QUICK SUMMARY

This article is my personal response to Episode 1 of Netflix’s (Un)Well, originally written in 2020 and updated in 2026 on the 6th anniversary 0f being released so the research, regulatory context, and terminology are current.

My core message has not changed. I believe my wife and I were presented in a way that removed important context from our interview. I also take responsibility for two things I got wrong: I made an insensitive comment about people on food stamps, for which I sincerely apologize, and I mistakenly referred to Mary of Bethany as Mary Magdalene.

The science also deserves context. Essential oils and their constituents have demonstrated meaningful anticancer activity in preclinical research, while human oncology research is currently much stronger for supportive symptom management, including anxiety, nausea, sleep, fatigue, and pain, than for direct tumor treatment. Essential oils can also be used internally when the specific oil, product, dose, carrier, timing, duration, interactions, and audience cautions are appropriate. FDA food-use status for certain oils does not mean every essential oil is safe to swallow in any amount.

Finally, legitimate multilevel marketing is not automatically an illegal pyramid scheme, but longevity alone does not prove that a compensation model is lawful or financially wise. Current FTC guidance focuses on what the plan actually incentivizes, and current income-disclosure research shows that most MLM participants earn little or no money. I still believe reputable network marketing can offer some people a lower-capital way to enter business, but the opportunity should be evaluated with clear eyes and truthful earnings information.

To say that I was horrified when I first watched the episode would be an understatement.

In this article, I will provide the backstory about how and why we got involved with the (Un)Well Netflix series, clarify statements that I believe were presented without important context, correct statements I personally got wrong, and offer my sincere apology for making an insensitive comment.

Never would I have agreed to participate if I had expected the final episode to take what I viewed as such a negative approach toward multilevel marketing and the essential oils industry as a whole. My wife and I came away feeling grossly misrepresented in Episode 1, and we received considerable backlash and negative press afterward.

That is my perspective and recollection. I cannot speak to the producers' private motives, and I do not have the complete unedited interview to publish alongside this response. What I can do is tell you what I remember, own what I got wrong, and separate what current research supports from what it does not.

The Backstory

And we know that in all things God works for the good of those who love him, who have been called according to his purpose. (Romans 8:28)

Truth be told, we prayed earnestly about this opportunity to be featured on the (Un)Well Netflix series and sought counsel from our mentors and pastors. We felt like we got the “green light,” so we jumped in with innocence and excitement that this could be a new vehicle to spread our Bible health message.

And yes, in spite of the negative press and hate mail we received, I am blessed to have had the opportunity to share my healing testimony in Christ, to pray with my family, and to be filmed at church worshipping our Lord and Savior.

We believed then, and still believe, that God can use difficult circumstances for good.

When we were first presented with the opportunity to be part of the documentary in 2019, we were skeptical and unsure whether we, and the essential oils industry, would be represented fairly, so we didn't immediately agree to be interviewed.

Having supposedly discovered me online because my bestselling book, The Healing Power of Essential Oils, ranked highly for essential oil searches on Google, the documentary team told me they respected my work and viewed me as an important voice in the field.

I actually recommended that they interview essential oils safety expert Robert Tisserand or my aromatherapy mentor Sylla Sheppard-Hanger from the Atlantic Institute of Aromatherapy because they had spent decades in the industry. The documentary team reassured me that they wanted to interview me as a newer, fresh face who could discuss research and the modern essential oils movement.

Looking back after seeing the final edit, I interpreted that decision very differently.

An “Unbiased” Look at Natural Health

The film team assured me that the (Un)Well Netflix series was going to be an “unbiased” look at the natural health industry, giving supporters and critics room to represent their positions.

I was told that my role was to represent the scientific side of essential oils, discuss peer-reviewed research, and explain therapeutic applications. So my wife and I agreed to be featured.

Afterward, a member of the documentary team described the series to The Guardian as an effort to sort through conflicting information and distinguish fact from fiction in a rapidly growing wellness industry.

From my perspective, that description reflected a more skeptical framing than I believed had been communicated to us going into filming.

That does not mean every criticism in the documentary was illegitimate. Natural health should be examined critically. Essential oil advocates should be able to defend what we teach with evidence, responsible dosing, and honest limitations.

But I would argue that essential oil research deserves far more nuance than the idea that there is little hard data.

Today, human trials and systematic reviews examine essential-oil interventions for anxiety, sleep, pain, nausea, stress, and other symptom-focused outcomes. Cancer research also includes a large preclinical literature evaluating cytotoxicity, signaling pathways, inflammation, oxidative mechanisms, and drug-delivery approaches. What we must not do is blur those evidence levels together. (1, 2)

I cannot speak to the other modalities discussed in the series, including breast milk, bee stings, tantric sex, fasting, or ayahuasca. I can speak to research involving essential oils and chronic disease.

At the time of filming, I referred to this as the subject of our “next book.” That statement is obviously outdated now. The research later became part of our published work, including The Essential Oils Apothecary.

The Filming Process

To be part of the film, we were required to film a masterclass and cover the expenses related to our local film crew coming to the house, along with hair and makeup, so the documentary team could capture us recording a class and film my wife “behind the scenes.”

The documentary team specifically asked us to teach about using essential oils for chronic disease, plant sustainability, and fair trade.

The documentary crew filmed at our home over the course of about two and a half days, following us to church, seeing a day in the life of our family, and conducting the main interview.

The Interview

Unfortunately, I do not have the full interview at my disposal.

Going from memory and confirming with my wife, who was present for much of the interview, here are the points I most wanted to clarify.

First off, the apologies. And yes, there are apologies. I misspoke about one thing, and I made an insensitive comment about another.

Sincere Apology

I would like to offer my humble apologies for making an insensitive statement about how anyone can afford our classes.

“Even people on food stamps,” I said, if people “stopped buying Starbucks for two weeks.”

When I watched the documentary for the first time, my heart sank when I heard this come out of my mouth. I had forgotten I even said it.

The context behind the comment was personal. I had been on food stamps for more than three years while earning my doctorate and trying my best to provide for my wife and three children. That part of my story was not included alongside the statement in the final episode.

But context does not excuse the way I said it.

There is no excuse for making an insensitive comment like that. For this, I sincerely apologize.

What triggered the statement was that I felt the interviewer was challenging my character over the $77 price of our signature essential oils masterclass.

I was taken aback because, as far as we were aware, comparable aromatherapy and natural-health courses often cost substantially more. We had also been advised repeatedly by marketing firms that we should charge more.

But that is not our mission.

Our mission is not to make a lot of money off a few people. Our goal as a business is to earn a fair profit while making useful education affordable and accessible to as many families as possible.

Whatever the context, I could have communicated that without reducing the very real financial pressures that families receiving food assistance face. I am sorry.

Mary Magdalene

One other comment I made requires correction.

I referred to the woman who anointed Jesus with costly spikenard as Mary Magdalene.

John 12:1-8 identifies her as Mary of Bethany, the sister of Martha and Lazarus. I misspoke when I called her Mary Magdalene, and I appreciate those who corrected me.

There is one additional terminology point worth cleaning up in this 2026 update.

The Biblical text describes a costly perfume or ointment of pure nard. It is better not to automatically call that ancient preparation a modern steam-distilled “essential oil extract.” Spikenard is an aromatic Biblical plant, but ancient perfumery preparations and modern essential oils are not necessarily chemically or technologically identical.

The faith point remains beautiful. Mary used something costly and fragrant in an act of devotion to Jesus. The botanical terminology should simply be accurate.

Can Essential Oils Cure Cancer?

In their defense, one thing the documentary crew told me from the beginning was that the film was intended to be controversial. They were interested in hearing my perspective on ingesting oils, using oils for cancer, and other debated topics.

The interviewer repeatedly challenged me about whether I thought essential oils could “cure” cancer.

She wanted a definitive yes or no answer, but I would not give her one because the subject is more complicated than a television sound bite.

If you'd like to learn more about how I view essential oils in the cancer conversation, please review my report, Truth About Essential Oils for Cancer here.

What the Research Actually Supports Today

Essential oils and isolated essential-oil constituents have demonstrated anticancer activity in laboratory and animal models. Researchers have reported effects on cancer-cell viability, apoptosis, oxidative pathways, inflammation, angiogenesis, migration, and other mechanisms.

A 2024 review of essential oils and nanoformulations for breast cancer concluded that essential oils have shown anticancer potential in preclinical models, while also emphasizing major barriers to clinical translation, including volatility, stability, solubility, delivery, and the need for stronger human evidence. (2)

That is meaningful science.

It is also not the same as proving that an essential oil cures cancer in people.

Where human oncology evidence is much stronger is supportive care.

A 2024 systematic review and meta-analysis found aromatherapy interventions improved several physical and psychological outcomes in patients with cancer, including sleep quality, fatigue, anxiety, depression, and vomiting frequency. (1)

Another 2024 meta-analysis found inhaled aromatherapy reduced chemotherapy-related nausea and combined nausea and vomiting across the included randomized trials, although effects varied by outcome and protocol. (3)

And a 2025 oncology quality-improvement project using a lavender, orange, and peppermint blend reported significant reductions in anxiety and stress among hospitalized cancer patients. (4)

It is important to note that we have known people personally and professionally who have told us emphatically that essential oils were instrumental in their cancer recovery and who describe themselves as having been “cured.”

I am not going to call those friends liars.

But testimony and clinical evidence are different categories. We cannot independently verify what caused another person's remission, what treatments they received, or what role an essential oil played.

That distinction protects both the testimony and the science.

Essential-oil constituents do possess pharmacologically active properties, and many have demonstrated chemopreventive, cytotoxic, or treatment-relevant mechanisms in preclinical research. You can learn more about the chemistry and safety of essential oils in Tisserand and Young's Essential Oil Safety: A Guide for Health Care Professionals, 2nd Edition.

We are NOT claiming miracle cures, nor have we in the past.

Our position is that essential oils can play a meaningful complementary role in a cancer patient's healing journey, especially for symptom management, comfort, stress, nausea, sleep, pain, and quality of life, while preclinical anticancer mechanisms continue to be studied.

Cancer treatment decisions themselves should be made with an oncology team that knows the complete medication, supplement, herb, and essential-oil plan. Concentrated natural products can interact with medications and treatment protocols.

Are Essential Oils Safe to Ingest?

The interviewer also questioned whether it is safe to ingest essential oils.

This remains one of the most controversial topics in the essential oils industry, and I was expecting the question.

I referred to the longstanding use of essential oils and their constituents in the food and flavoring industry and explained that the main issue is dosing. That dosing discussion was not included in the final episode.

Food Use Is Real, but GRAS Is Not a Blank Check

FDA's food-substance inventory lists a number of essential oils as flavoring agents or adjuvants under specific food regulations. Examples include peppermint, rosemary, dill, cinnamon, ginger, Roman chamomile, German chamomile, and many others. (5)

That supports an important point we have taught for years: internal exposure to essential oils is not inherently or universally forbidden.

But the regulatory language must be used correctly.

GRAS means “Generally Recognized As Safe” under the conditions of intended use. FDA explains that a substance intentionally added to food must either be approved as a food additive, qualify as GRAS under its intended conditions, or fall under another applicable exception. (6)

So “this oil appears in food regulations” does not mean:

• Every essential oil is safe to swallow.
• Every brand or chemotype is appropriate for food use.
• Any number of drops is safe.
• A flavoring-level exposure automatically validates a medicinal oral dose.
• Food-use status overrides medication interactions, pregnancy cautions, liver or kidney disease, age, allergy, or toxicity concerns.

That distinction is especially timely because FDA proposed additional GRAS oversight on August 10, 2026, with the stated goal of increasing transparency and consumer protection around substances added to food. (6)

How We Approach Internal Essential Oil Use

Some aromatherapy schools and experienced practitioners teach responsible internal use within defined dosing frameworks. Internal use can be appropriate when it is specific rather than casual.

Culinary internal use means an oil suitable and labeled for food use is incorporated into a complete recipe at a recipe-specific amount and properly dispersed throughout the food.

Medicinal internal use requires much more precision. A responsible protocol should identify:

• The exact oil or blend
• The amount
• The edible carrier or delivery method
• Timing
• Frequency
• Duration
• A stopping or rotation rule
• Medication and supplement interactions
• Who should not use the protocol

This is why “never ingest essential oils” is too broad, but “essential oils are safe to ingest” is also too broad.

Dose, chemistry, route, product identity, and the person using the oil matter.

Can I ingest essential oils?

Do not casually ingest essential oils in water or neat (undiluted). Internal use of essential oils requires proper dilution, product quality, dosing knowledge, and safety guidance. Learn more about how to ingest essential oils here.

These dosing principles are the basis for the recipes and protocols we teach in our books and classes.

My frustration with the documentary was never that the interviewer raised the safety question. It was that I felt the final edit did not include enough of the dosing context needed to understand my answer.

We Run a Multi-7-Figure Company

Now to the most controversial part of all, and the part that caused us so much grief.

This is the part of the interview where I should have known something was awry.

Looking back, I should have stopped the interview rather than continuing as the conversation shifted toward our financial success. But I was concerned that refusing to answer would itself be used in the final cut.

So I put on my best smile and tried to answer positively.

The interviewer referred to our “big” home. At the time, we lived in a modest five-bedroom home in the suburbs of Atlanta that fit our family of seven comfortably.

I felt that the questioning implied we were profiteering from people's desperation to get healthy, and I became defensive.

What “Multi-7-Figure” Meant in Context

After repeated questions about income, I explained that we had built a multi-seven-figure business.

That statement referred to company revenue, not our personal take-home income.

At the time, I also explained that we employed about 15 people around the globe, had donated $50,000 to the Independent Cancer Research Foundation around the launch of our first essential oils masterclass, and had donated additional products and resources to people and organizations in financial need.

We also offered free screenings of our classes throughout the year. By the time the original article was written, nearly 750,000 people had accessed those free screenings since 2015.

Those are historical numbers from that season, not claims about the company's current revenue, staffing, donations, or audience in 2026.

An important side note here: company revenue is not the same as personal income or business profit. Like any business, we carry overhead. Generating millions in gross revenue does not mean we personally “net” millions of dollars.

I feel it's important to point out that it is not a sin to be successful or to earn money.

We give God all the glory for whatever success we may have achieved over the years, whether I was making $45,000 as a bank manager or running our company.

I was raised by hard-working, blue-collar, middle-class American parents who did what they needed to put food on the table and meet our basic needs. I did not come from a wealthy background and I know what it is like not to have much money.

While I was earning my doctorate in chiropractic, we received government food assistance and accumulated consumer debt trying to make ends meet, in addition to student loans for tuition and clinical training.

I'm not complaining, nor do I feel entitled to anything.

I'm stating that I decided to invest in my career at a great cost, and I do not believe running a successful business is something for which a person automatically owes an apology.

With that said, I'm always open to discussion and suggestions about how we can maximize charitable giving, support people in need, and make as much educational content as possible freely available.

Multi-Level Marketing Companies

Like I said above, I would not have agreed to be part of the (Un)Well Netflix series if I had known the final episode would frame multilevel marketing and the essential oils industry the way it did.

Some of our closest friends and colleagues have been distributors for the major essential oil MLM companies featured in the film, and we have the utmost respect for our friends and colleagues.

At one point, the interviewer asked me about my feelings regarding multilevel marketing.

My position was, and remains, that reputable network-marketing opportunities can offer a lower-capital entry into business for some people because the parent company manages product development, manufacturing, warehousing, fulfillment, payment systems, and other infrastructure that an independent product company would otherwise need to build.

I said:

I admire reputable network marketing opportunities as a business option for people who don't have the capital to develop inventory, manufacture products, and build an entire operating system from scratch.

If you are developing and selling your own physical product, it can take months or years and substantial capital to formulate products, manufacture, package, warehouse, ship, maintain inventory, build systems, handle returns, and operate legally.

That part of my argument still stands.

But one argument in the original version of this article needs updating.

Longevity Does Not Prove an MLM Is Legal

I originally argued that it was hard for me to believe two large companies could operate for many years if they truly were pyramid schemes.

That is not a sound legal test.

The FTC's current MLM guidance says the analysis depends on what the compensation plan actually incentivizes and whether the practical focus is product sales or promoting and recruiting into the program. A company can sell real products and still have an unlawful compensation structure if recruitment is the economic engine. (7)

Likewise, a lawsuit alleging that a company is a pyramid scheme is an allegation, not itself a finding that the company is one.

The class-action story I linked in the original article can still be read here, but it should not be treated as a legal conclusion merely because a complaint was filed.

The Earnings Question Deserves More Attention Than I Gave It in 2020

It is also true that most people who join MLMs do not make substantial income.

In 2024, FTC staff reviewed 70 publicly available MLM income disclosure statements. The agency reported that most participants shown in those disclosures made $1,000 or less per year, often before expenses, and that in at least 17 MLMs most participants made no money at all. (8)

That does not prove every MLM is fraudulent. It does mean income claims should be evaluated with much more rigor than success stories from top distributors.

The FTC's June 2026 guidance emphasizes that MLM companies and distributors must substantiate earnings and lifestyle claims with what typical participants are likely to earn, rather than using unusually successful people to imply that those outcomes are typical. (9)

And in 2026 the agency continued bringing cases involving deceptive MLM earnings claims, demonstrating that this remains an active consumer-protection issue. (10)

So my updated position is straightforward:

• MLM is a business structure, not automatically a synonym for “illegal pyramid scheme.”
• A real product does not automatically make an MLM lawful.
• The compensation plan and real-world incentives matter.
• Typical net earnings after expenses matter.
• Recruiting claims should be truthful, substantiated, and realistic.
• People considering an opportunity should read the current income disclosure and compensation plan before spending money.

I still believe the network-marketing representatives and essential oil companies in the film deserved a fair presentation.

I also believe that defending an industry does not require us to ignore its weaknesses.

We can support friends who work in network marketing, reject caricatures of every MLM participant as gullible or predatory, and still insist on truthful earnings claims, transparent compensation, and ethical recruiting.

Netflix (Un)Well Essential Oils FAQs

Why did Dr. Z agree to appear in Netflix's (Un)Well?

We prayed about the opportunity, sought counsel, and believed the series could provide a way to share our Bible health message and explain what peer-reviewed research says about essential oils.

Does Dr. Z regret appearing in (Un)Well?

I consider it a very real lesson learned. I am grateful that my testimony, family prayer, and faith were included, but I believe important context from the interview was omitted and I would approach a documentary opportunity very differently today.

What did Dr. Z apologize for after (Un)Well?

I sincerely apologized for my insensitive comment suggesting that people receiving food assistance could afford a class simply by giving up Starbucks. My own history of receiving food assistance explained where the comment came from, but it did not excuse the wording.

Was Mary Magdalene the woman with spikenard?

No. In John 12:1-8, the woman who anoints Jesus with costly nard is Mary of Bethany, sister of Martha and Lazarus. I mistakenly called her Mary Magdalene in the interview.

Does the Bible say Mary used essential oil?

The passage describes costly perfume or ointment of pure nard. Spikenard is an aromatic Biblical plant, but it is more precise not to assume that the ancient preparation was identical to a modern steam-distilled essential oil.

Did Dr. Z say essential oils cure cancer?

My position is not that human research has proven essential oils cure cancer. Preclinical studies show anticancer mechanisms worth investigating, while human clinical research currently supports aromatherapy much more strongly for supportive symptoms such as anxiety, nausea, sleep, fatigue, and pain. (1, 2, 3)

Are essential oils safe to ingest?

Internal use can be appropriate when the exact oil, dose, carrier, timing, frequency, duration, interactions, and individual cautions are understood. Culinary food use and medicinal internal use are not the same thing. FDA food-use status for a substance does not mean unlimited oral use is safe. (5, 6)

Does FDA recognize essential oils for use in food?

Yes. FDA's food-substance database lists numerous essential oils as flavoring agents or adjuvants under applicable regulations. That status applies under intended conditions of use and should not be interpreted as blanket approval of every oil, product, route, or medicinal dose. (5, 6)

Are all MLM companies pyramid schemes?

No. FTC guidance does not classify every MLM as an illegal pyramid scheme. The legal analysis focuses on the compensation structure and real-world incentives, including whether the program's focus is promoting recruitment rather than selling products to genuine customers. (7)

Do most MLM participants make money?

Current FTC analysis gives good reason for caution. In the agency's review of 70 MLM income disclosures, most participants shown made $1,000 or less per year, often before expenses, and at least 17 disclosures showed most participants earning nothing. (8)

What is the biggest lesson Dr. Z took from (Un)Well?

Do not assume that a producer, editor, journalist, or platform will preserve the context you believe is most important. Think carefully before speaking on camera, own mistakes immediately, and make corrections publicly when you get something wrong.

Final Thoughts

All in all, I consider this a very real lesson learned.

Don't trust movie producers, don't trust mainstream media and streaming services, always think twice or three times before you say anything in front of a camera, and always make right what you do wrong.

I would add one thing: be just as willing to scrutinize your own side as the people criticizing it.

Truth does not need us to exaggerate the evidence. And when we personally get something wrong, humility is more powerful than defensiveness.

Thank you for hearing me out, and I wish you all of God's blessings on your life.

~ Dr. Eric Zielinski (“Dr. Z”)

References: