$300m in year two. The controversy came free.

Note: Transcripts are automatically generated from episode audio, and are not fully corrected for spelling, grammar, and formatting.

PETER RAHAL: Anything that’s really innovative and new in our culture and the world gets misunderstood. Americans have realized that protein is the most important macronutrient. It’s the most expensive. It’s the hardest to get. It doesn’t always taste good. So what do people want from a protein bar? Really, you want a protein delivery system.

BOB SAFIAN: Are there any ways that controversy like this is good for a new brand?

RAHAL: All things equal, you’d rather have people talking about you than not.

SAFIAN: That’s Peter Rahal, founder and CEO of protein bar company David, one of the hottest new consumer products of the last two years. I first met Peter when he was running RXBAR, which he sold to Kellogg for $600 million. I wanted to talk with him now not only because of David’s phenomenal success out of the gate, but because the company has thrived despite a series of controversies, from multiple lawsuits to an awkward connection to Jeffrey Epstein. Peter talks to me about how innovation can create obstacles, but also opportunity. We delve into food science, social media marketing, and his rather contentious assertion that protein itself is masculine. There’s a lot unconventional about Peter’s approach, so let’s get to it. I’m Bob Safian, and this is Rapid Response.

[THEME MUSIC]

I’m here with Peter Rahal, CEO of David, the popular protein bar. Peter, welcome to the show.

RAHAL: Great to be here.

Copy LinkWhat is David Protein?

SAFIAN: David has had a tremendous run since launching in 2024. It’s on track for more than $300 million in revenue in just your second full year. I will say that I didn’t immediately associate the brand with you. You didn’t call it Peter or Rahal. Why David?

RAHAL: Our namesake is Michelangelo’s masterpiece, the sculpture of David. The chisel is this really crude tool. It’s a nail. It’s what Michelangelo used. But when you apply discipline and intelligence to it, you can create a masterpiece and create something beautiful. The values of the brand and what we stand for are discipline, education or intelligence, and beauty.

SAFIAN: With David, it’s part of a new wave of bars with high protein and low fat. Few of them, though, pack the combination that David does. The package says 28 grams of protein, 150 calories, no sugar, which sounds impossible. And I guess it would be without the sort of special ingredient called EPG. If I understand it right, EPG is a kind of fat that’s hard for the human body to absorb.

RAHAL: Yeah. It’s a hard fat, so it’s a high-melt-point fat, and it’s a modified triglyceride. Your body has an enzyme called lipase that breaks off the fatty acids from the glycerol backbone, and that’s where all the energy gets released. If you prevent lipase from doing that, your body can’t digest it. It’s really like a biohack. Your mouth experiences it as fat, but then your body isn’t able to break it down. And because it’s a 104-degree melt-point, it’s a hard fat similar to beef tallow or palm oil. It goes through your body in a solid state.

SAFIAN: As I recall, there was a product back in the 1990s with some similar attributes, Olestra, but it wasn’t well tolerated. People came away with cramps and whatnot. So is EPG like an Olestra descendant?

RAHAL: It’s the same idea, but different. It’s not the same mechanism. The fundamental problem with that technology was it was liquid at 95 degrees. So at body temperature, it was liquid, and the tolerance is much lower. In the ’90s, there were four attempts at this technology, coming off successful innovation around sugar substitutes and high-intensity sweeteners. The industry looked to reduce calories, and fat is obviously the most dense in energy, or calories. There was a race to do this. Olestra was first and basically totally blew up the market. But because of the debacle of Olestra, it left the whole category behind.

SAFIAN: Everybody just ran away from it then.

RAHAL: Everyone ran away from it. The one that was actually the best innovation just got forgotten.

SAFIAN: Were you already planning to do another protein bar, to do David, before you knew about EPG? Or was EPG like, “Oh, this enables me to do something,” and that made you think, “I’ll go back into this business”?

RAHAL: No, it was more that I was designing a protein bar from first principles. What do people want from a protein bar? They want the most protein, the least amount of calories, and obviously great taste and texture, and price and some other factors. But really, you want a protein delivery system. Then there’s fat. You need fat for mouthfeel and texture, but with fat, you really don’t want any calories. In that search, I realized EPG was unequivocally the best fat to use. In that pursuit of the best fat system, it was pretty crystal clear that EPG was the one you want in a protein bar.

Copy LinkWhy vertical integration became critical to David’s strategy

SAFIAN: You wanted it enough that last year you bought the company that manufactured it, Epogee, that owns the patent. You were then sued by competitors for blocking their access to it, for terminating contracts. That suit was dismissed. But were you thinking from the beginning that you might want to use all the EPG yourself for David?

RAHAL: When we started to get traction, our demand was going to consume all the capacity Epogee could make. And if you’re on the Epogee side, it’s really hard to scale an ingredient company because you have this chicken-and-egg problem. You want people to adopt your ingredient. There’s not enough supply to service the demand. There’s not enough demand to justify the creation of more supply. So the Epogee team basically came to me and said, “We have a crazy idea.” And I was like, “Let’s hear it.” They said, “Let’s merge and you guys take it over, because you really kind of need to vertically integrate these businesses.” So it wasn’t just a straight acquisition. They’re on the cap table today.

SAFIAN: I can imagine that when you then get lawsuits from competitors saying, “Oh, you did this to screw us,” it’s got to be like, “No, no, no, they came to me.”

RAHAL: Yeah, they came to me. And they would’ve been screwed even if the deal didn’t happen, because there was no supply, and we had a supply agreement that gave us the right to all the inventory that was available.

Copy LinkInside the controversies challenging David

SAFIAN: You faced some other controversy in the short, intense rise you’ve had. There was a class action lawsuit challenging your labeling, which was also withdrawn, but it claimed that there was more fat and more calories than listed because of the way you calculate EPG.

RAHAL: Well, it wasn’t that. It was actually that they just didn’t know about EPG. And I think the thing is, anything that’s really innovative and new in our culture and the world gets misunderstood.

SAFIAN: So you think of these as well-meaning concerns, as opposed to a stunt by competitors trying to slow you down.

RAHAL: It’s just part of the territory of innovation.

SAFIAN: Are there any ways that controversy like this is good for a new brand? Like, the more people know you, the better?

RAHAL: Yeah, I think over time, it’s a net positive. It’s bringing attention to something innovative. It’s teaching people. It’s educating in a way. All things equal, you’d rather have people talking about you than not.

SAFIAN: I have one more bumpy moment I have to ask about. Your chief science officer and initial investor was the author and wellness guru, Dr. Peter Attia. He stepped down after previous communications with Jeffrey Epstein surfaced in court documents. How did you and Peter connect, and how did you personally react when you heard about this Epstein connection?

RAHAL: Yeah, so I met Peter through a friend. Peter was America’s doctor. He was the voice of nutrition and really influential. I wanted someone to guide us on the science, so we agreed to have him as the chief science officer. Then I think it was February. I woke up on a Saturday morning, checked X, saw the Epstein files had been released, and Peter was in them. I was like, “Of course, he’s probably the best private-practice doctor in America. I’m not surprised he had patients in that world, whatever.” Then everyone was like, “Oh, shit, people are going after him. He’s a doctor. You can’t be hanging out with Epstein.” And then I was like, “Oh, this is bad.” Peter came to the conclusion, like, “Hey, listen, I need to take a step back from my responsibilities, focus on my family most importantly, and focus on my practice.” As a company, we stand with the victims, and it’s obviously frustrating that the DOJ isn’t doing anything for the victims in all of this, and it’s quite gross. We stand with the victims and respect Peter, but yeah, we had to go separate ways.

Copy LinkManaging crisis communications across social platforms

SAFIAN: David’s in 16,000-some retailers now, but you started selling via TikTok Shop. I’m curious: It’s tough to address challenges on social media platforms in general for a lot of brands, for a lot of people. How did you approach that kind of challenge, whether with the lawsuits or Attia or other detractors? Is there a philosophy you have about the way you communicate on social?

RAHAL: Yeah. The population consumes different media, and the generations consume different media, and that’s the tricky part. Boomers are watching TV, maybe on Facebook. Millennials are primarily on Instagram. Gen Z is on TikTok, and so is Gen Alpha. So you have to address all those information routes. I think the most important thing is speed and directness. If you don’t have a platform and audience, you just get lost. Thankfully, I have a good reputation, and if I post something on X, people will listen to it and it gets exposure, so that’s really helpful. But on TikTok, what’s interesting is our strategy is, yes, we can say something, but if it’s not entertaining, it doesn’t get picked up.

SAFIAN: Sometimes detractors can be entertaining, and that just sort of goes on its own, and you’ve got to let it go.

RAHAL: Remember in the ’90s, people tried good news, but it didn’t work. Good news doesn’t work. Rage works. Fear works. Bad news works. There’s this weird incentive for content creators to make negative or bad news because that’s what gets engagement. A positive review doesn’t go viral.

SAFIAN: I just want to pause here to acknowledge the calm Peter is exhibiting when describing the range of controversies he’s had to navigate with David. I’m sure he’s not always so even-keeled, but it’s hard to imagine the David business gathering the momentum it has without steadiness and resilience. So what’s Peter’s plan for keeping the momentum going? We’ll talk about that and more after the break. Stay with us.

[AD BREAK]

Before the break, Peter Rahal talked about the incredible success of protein bar David in the face of a series of obstacles. Now he talks about plans to keep the momentum going, plus why he believes protein is masculine — an assertion that makes me a bit uneasy, as you’ll hear in real time. Let’s jump back in.

Copy LinkExpanding from bars into high protein ice cream

I saw that you just released another new product, this high-protein ice cream, which sold out very quickly. Is that the next market, or are you really like, “No, we’re David bars. We have a little ice cream, but we’re focused on the bars”?

RAHAL: Yeah. What we’re seeing with ice cream is, I think that could be equal to the bar business. Traditional ice cream is full of cream and sugar. With our product, it actually allows you to eat it without the consequences of getting into a caloric surplus.

SAFIAN: And is EPG the secret ingredient, or whatever the special thing is, that allows that in ice cream in a similar way to what it does with the bars?

RAHAL: I would say it’s the combination. It’s basically EPG, which gives you the texture, then whey protein isolate, which is a version of milk, and then allulose, which is a rare sugar. You can think of it as a really high-tech ice cream. There’s a version of sugar, a version of cream, and a version of milk. With bars, you see people complain about texture and complain about nutrition. We’re able to deliver a product with the protein of a meal and the calories of a snack. And the ice cream situation is like, I love ice cream, but it’s 1,400 calories a pint and like 40 grams of sugar. So to offer something that’s a fourth of the calories with some protein, it’s a really valuable offering.

Copy LinkWhy protein demand is a lasting shift, not a fad

SAFIAN: Do you worry at all that protein is the fashionable macronutrient of the moment, but it might fade? Consumers do tend to move on to the next thing. So how do you future-proof the business?

RAHAL: If protein started to slow down in popularity, that would not be a bad thing for us because there are supply issues with protein.

SAFIAN: Because you’re growing so fast, it’s just hard to keep up with it?

RAHAL: I think it’s more that Americans have realized that protein’s the most important macronutrient. It’s the most expensive. It’s the hardest to get. It doesn’t always taste good. What you’re seeing over the past two years, and it’s driven by GLP-1s, it’s driven by general education, is that protein’s really valuable, the cornerstone of a really balanced diet. And the RDA recommendation of 50 grams is not for optimizing or thriving, it’s just to survive. We’re betting the company that it’s the most important macronutrient. The evidence is overwhelming that it is. Are too many people entering it and putting protein in places it shouldn’t be? Probably. Are people going to be exhausted by that? Probably. Are there a lot of companies doing it that probably won’t be here in two years? Probably. In 10 years, is protein going to be more popular than it is today? I think it’s going to be equal to or greater than it is today. It’s not like a diet trend.

SAFIAN: You mentioned GLP-1s. How does that fit into this? For some folks, it’s an alternate way to address their intake.

RAHAL: I think it’s an enormous breakthrough that will change nutrition culture forever. Nutrition no longer becomes the main intervention. So I don’t think you’re going to see these wild swings in popular diets that move back and forth. I think you’re going to see people take GLP-1s, and if you’re taking a GLP-1, the recommendation is to ensure you get enough protein and fiber to offset the potential downsides of muscle atrophy, which is the main risk with it. I don’t see that changing for the foreseeable future.

Copy LinkThe theory behind giving a protein bar a male identity

SAFIAN: And I was curious, the name David — did you worry at all about it appealing less to women?

RAHAL: No. Men will not consume feminine things. They just don’t. Women will consume masculine things if they’re aesthetic or beautiful. If anything, it’s cool for women to consume masculine things if they’re aesthetic, but the inverse does not happen. You would never have a pink protein bar. You’d be like, “That’s not for me.” But if you were to have a protein bar that was masculine yet had good design or aesthetic, you would consume that, and your wife would too.

SAFIAN: And when you look at who the customers are for David, that has been borne out, that it’s balanced?

RAHAL: No, it’s actually 60/40 female to male.

SAFIAN: So you picked the male name so that you could appeal to the men, because you could have made it pink.

RAHAL: It’s not about appealing to men. It’s about not turning off men, really. We don’t have gender in language in English like other languages do, but if you were to give a gender to a protein bar, it would be a man.

SAFIAN: Because?

RAHAL: It’s masculine.

SAFIAN: I mean, because protein isn’t just masculine. Women have protein, plenty of protein in—

RAHAL: Yeah, of course. But it’s not about that. Something can be masculine, and masculine and feminine can live in both genders. It’s just about the energy of it. It has masculine traits. So therefore, if you’re going to give it a gender, you give it a man, a masculine thing.

SAFIAN: So you’re two years into this adventure. What’s at stake for David right now?

RAHAL: Everything is important. Right now in our life cycle, what’s at stake is coming to market, building distribution, and bringing on the right retail partners.

SAFIAN: Well, thanks for sitting down to have the chat.

RAHAL: Thanks, Bob.

SAFIAN: Peter left me uncharacteristically speechless at the end of our conversation. David’s growth has been extraordinary, especially in the face of lawsuits and controversy, so maybe his analysis of consumers is spot on. Something about his framing of a molecule like protein as masculine, though, strikes me as reductive and inappropriate, echoing the problematic realms of the so-called manosphere. But hey, Peter says that controversy is a net positive, so maybe he’s unconcerned about it. And I suppose he could be deliberately stirring the pot. We’ll see what TikTok has to say about it all.

I’m Bob Safian. Thanks for listening.