If you spend time in GLP-1 communities, you've seen David protein bars: roughly 28 grams of protein for about 150 calories and almost no fat. That macro profile is close to too-good-to-be-true, and the ingredient that makes it possible — EPG — is exactly where the controversy lives.
What EPG actually is
EPG stands for esterified propoxylated glycerol. It's a modified, plant-based fat engineered so that your body largely doesn't digest or absorb it. Regular fat carries about 9 calories per gram; EPG contributes roughly 0.7 calories per gram. So it behaves like fat in the bar — the mouthfeel, the texture, the role fat plays in food — while contributing almost none of fat's calories. That's the trick behind the numbers on the label. EPG has received a GRAS ("generally recognized as safe") designation with the FDA.
Why GLP-1 users got interested
This isn't a coincidence. On a GLP-1, appetite drops and protein becomes the hardest target to hit — you need a lot of it in not much food. A high-protein, low-calorie, low-volume snack is almost tailor-made for that problem, which is why these bars spread fast in the community as a convenient way to close the protein gap (the same role a protein supplement plays).
The controversy: what it was really about
The flashpoint was a class-action lawsuit alleging that David bars actually contain far more fat and calories than the label states — figures cited in coverage ran as high as about 80% more calories and 400% more fat than the nutrition panel showed.
The core of the dispute is genuinely interesting, and it's about measurement, not obvious deception. Standard lab methods for measuring fat count EPG as ordinary fat — at 9 calories per gram — because chemically it is a fat. But your body doesn't absorb most of it, so the calories you actually take in are much lower. David labels the bars based on the ~0.7 calories per gram your body absorbs; a conventional lab assay "sees" the full fat weight and reports a much higher number. Both are describing the same bar with different rulers. It's a real gray area in how novel ingredients get measured and labeled, not a settled case of mislabeling.